Why banishment? January 23, 2008
Posted by John A. Davison in general.trackback
Since I have not yet had to banish anyone from participation here, I have been thinking about why so many blogs and forum heads insist on banishing their adversaries. Pharyngula, Uncommon Descent, Panda’s Thumb and many other blogs and forums ban comments from adversaries and often erect barriers making it very difficult to register. P.Z. Myers of Pharyngula periodically complains about how his “security has been penetrated,” sounding more and more like Captain Queeg of the Caine Mutiny. He has another revealing tactic. He will allow comments to be sent from anyone but only he decides which will ever appear. None of mine have. I had to resort to subterfuge to comment on his blog only to see my comments disappear within minutes.
DaveScot/David Springer of Uncommon Descent lets dissenters speak only then typically to dismiss their author with “___ is no longer with us” or “you’re outta here Homo” or some other equally charming farewell. Then if things get dull he may let them back in again so he can enjoy expelling them for a second and in my case a third time. My first banishment from Uncommon Descent consisted of being unable to reregister. I have no idea who was responsible for that one. Most probably it was Dembski. Of course banishment remains the responsibility of the blog owner or owners.
ARN and RichardDawkins.net have not only banished me but denied me viewing their proceedings from this computer.
Why do so many blogs and forums find it necessary to engage in such tactics? That is the subject of this thread. What does this mean? What does it accomplish? How can one properly respond to a critic if he cannot continue the dialogue to some sort of conclusion? Doesn’t it just promote resentment? Thankfully I have not yet had to delete a single comment or ban any user from this blog. Of course that may change. I look forward to the views of others on what I regard, with anonymity, as a very important issue. In the meantime -
“Will you walk into my parlour?” said the spider to the fly;
“T’is the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy.”
Mary Howitt
* As of August 21, 2008 I am also denied viewing the proceedings of “After The Bar Closes.”
It doesn’t get any better than this.
Well come on folks. Let’s hear all the reasons it is necessary to ban skeptics from so many internet blogs and “forums.” I can think only of obscenity or some other form of personal abuse such as woot’s current treatment of Martin. Even that can be remedied with sincere apology as far as I am concerned.
I intend to offer a forum a cut above the current norms as represented by Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, Uncommon Descent, RichardDawkins.net, ARN and especially After The Bar Closes where Martin is still being abused in a most uncivilized fashion, mostly by anonymous cowards.
Incidentally, in case anyone missed it, in my lexicon, anonymous and cowardly are synonyms.
If no one chooses to “walk into my parlour,” that is fine with me too!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I am sorry to report that I was forced to ban Woot, whoevever that is, when he refused to apologize about the nasty way he had treated Martin. The details are revealed on the “evolution is finished” thread. I had hoped that would not prove necessary, but I have no intention of allowing this blog to become a flame pit following in the footsteps of “Pharyngula,” “EvC,” “RichardDawkins.net,” “Panda’s Thumb” and especially “After The Bar Closes,” Wesley Elsberry’s “inner sanctum.” Woot, who entered this blog through deception, has threatened to return to further disrupt it. He gave me no choice.
It is time for a real forum, involving real names who can express themselves without rancor, ridicule and recrimination on some very important issues with which society is now confronted. What can be more important than discovering the secret of our own origin or confronting the very real possibility that this may be the last century for our civilization? Those are my concerns and I hope others will join me in civil dialogue.
However if they refuse to do so they can be certain that I will embrace their own tactics in the spirit of the old saw -
“When in Rome do as the Romans do.”
I believe the original was by Cervantes -
“When thou art at Rome, do as they do at Rome.”
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Thank you John.
I was not so offended by woot abuses as I was surprised by the lack of arguments he used. The neodarwinian folks are unable to address many issues which they pretend do not exist. One of them is the problem of descent of testicles. Neodarwinists used outdated phylogeny tree and solved ascend of testicles instead! I pointed their mistakes at AtBC. Of course there was no coherent answer (except utterly ridiculous babbling about cooling spermatozoa) and they only abused me and Slovakian people generally. That is their way of “scientific” discussion. But we only see that the problem of descent of testicles is unexplainable using neodarwinian paradigma. It was Swiss zoologist professor Adolf Portmann (1967) who mentioned unsatisfactory neodarwinian explanation of the phenomena.
Martin
You should be offended by abuses. I am and will not tolerate it here. I have no intention of letting this blog turn into a flame pit like “After The Bar Closes” or a “groupthink” like “Pharyngula” and “Panda’s Thumb” or a “reign of terror” where everyone has to agree or they are banned like “Uncommon Descent” and “EvC.” It is time for a real change in internet etiquette and I hope this blog can set a new standard for civil discourse. If it fails it won’t be my fault. If someone insists on personal insult, they will be given one opportunity to apologize. That is the way it is supposed to be, the way it was “prescribed” to be. If no one participates here that is fine too. Scientific truth was never decided by a majority of registered voters or by which petition had the most signatures or by which blog had the greatest number of users and visitors.
So far this blog is doing fine. Nearly all the right people on both sides of this silly debate are staying away. I like to think that is inspired by fear. Maybe that challenge will evoke a response but I doubt it.
“Discretion is the better part of valor.”
Shakespeare
“Walk into my parlour said the spider to the fly.
Mary Howitt”
Darwinism is the most failed hypothesis in the history of experimental and descriptive science. That failure expresses itself in the degenerate tactics the Darwinian mystics are now employing in dealing with their adversaries. No longer able to defend their dogma and lacking the intellectual and moral fiber to abandon it, now they can only lash out blindly at those who have always known that there was a purpose in the history of life, a history which I believe is now complete.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Speaking of banishment, there is a very interesting case of “selective banishment” in effect at ISCID’s “brainstorms” forum. For some time now I have been carrying on little more than a monologue as both my supporters, Daniel Smith and Martin have been baned as well as many others as near as I can tell. As one can see from the following link,
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-76.html
the forum has virtually disappeared as a venue for meaningful discussion. It reminds me of my final moments at “Panda’s Thumb” when Wesley Elsberry gave me my own short lived thread which he named “Davison’s Soap Box.” It went south off the bottom of the page as all threads do there and with it went Davison. I haven’t been able to speak there since.
I love it so!
Fortunately DaveScot/David Springer showed up this morning at “brainstorms” in his typically snide, condescending fashion which gave me the opportunity to ask him who gave him special dispensation to post where my supporters were denied.
I have never been able to understand this curious situation. Every paper I have published speaks loud and clear in support of Intelligent Design, yet I am denied a voice at Uncommon Descent, the home of the so-called “Intelligent Design Movement.” It is especially strange since in the past Springer has declared that Dembski thinks Davison is “nuts.” As I understand it “brainstorms” was Dembski’s “brainchild.” Weird isn’t it?
It will be interestng to see how Springer responds to my two questions, if he responds at all. I am surprised that he recognized my existence but, by so doing, he has offered me the opportunity to ask him for an explanation for this curious example of “selective banishment.”
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
How you can claim martyrdom and blithely ban posters arbitrarily is beyond me, John. Do you not see how this exposes you to the charge of hypocrisy? It woud appear that wOOt’s offence was to put forward the case of evolutionary biology. so you ban the only poster that has taken up your challenges.
Alan, I don’t see it the same way you do. Woot reminds me more of some kind of Pharyngulist or AtBCist who use abuses instead arguments. The only argument woot presented at One blog a day were prolonged legs of toads where he saw “evolution in action”. Here he trumped another news – speciation has taken place in the London tube. Also you with your limited knowledge of evolution probably sees what a nonsense all woot’s arguments are. I would say John would like to keep the level of ongoing discussion here above neodarwinian sewerage of Pharyngula and AtBC.
Alan Fox
Are you suggesting that I am not an evolutionary scientist and that I am a hypocrite? So it would seem from your message # 6. Those are serious charges and I recommend you withdraw them promptly. You come across as a champion of Darwinian mysticism which is all that Woot has ever been. You also seem to feel it is perfectly acceptable to become a user of this forum through deceptive means.
Woot’s offence was to insult Martin just as he had insulted both Martin and myself in other encounters long before he managed to invade this blog with his Machiavellian tactics, tactics he has repeated twice more since I shut him down.
I recommend that you respond to my most recent email as I have no intention of further airing our differences publicly while you co-sponsor this blog. You were very helpful in establishing this venue and I thank you or it.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Speaking of banishment, I was banished from Pharyngula long ago when my first and only comment was greeted with “your stench has preceeded you” by the master of snotty insult – P.Z. Myers.
I invite all to visit the following link -
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/01/reviews_already.php#comments
where P.Z comments on how he has been reviewed by his students, one of whom is his daughter Skatje who has her own blog. There I too was able to get in a lick. Maybe if Myers reads that lick he will screw up enough courage to mention it at Pharyngula or even, heaven forbid, put in an appearance here. I have serious money that says he won’t do either. Cowardly bullies are like that wherever they hold forth. They are only secure when surrounded by their cheering fans, a problem I fortunately don’t have. Ideologues with fan clubs rarely offer anything of significance. They are to busy gratifying their flock with witty comments and mindless insults.
“First make yourself unpopular, then people will take you seriously.”
Konrad Adenauer
Yes sir Konrad.
He also said -
“God designed the stomach to vomit up what was bad for it but he overlooked the human brain.”
Isn’t that precious?
I keep saying that it doesn’t get any better than this but it does, it really does!
i love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I am also holding forth with wild abandon at Salvador Cordova’s new blog -
http://www.youngcosmos.com/blog/
on several threads. It is fun getting old and letting it all hang out!
Enjoy, so I won’t have to repeat my comments here. Sal is a courageous opponent of Darwinian damn foolishness and I am happy to join him in that most gratifying venture. He is being treated shamelessly by the denizens of After The Bar Closes and elsewhere. I am delighted to give him a hand in resisting and exposing the atheist forces of evil!
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
The following is an extension of my remarks in message # 5
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=76#001132
The above link presents my response to DaveScot/David Springer in the form of a request for Dr. Dembski publicly to reopen “brainstorms” forum to comments by anyone who chooses to do so. It will be interesting to see how Dembski responds. I will keep everyone posted. Of that you can be certain. Isolation from ones supporters is simply unacceptable by any standard and reflects poorly on those responsible.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
VMartin remarks:
Alan, I don’t see it the same way you do.
No? Having been unfairly censored on so many blogs and forums, I can see why you wouldn’t. Well, it’s John’s blog and his choice.
John states:
Are you suggesting that I am not an evolutionary scientist and that I am a hypocrite? So it would seem from your message # 6. Those are serious charges and I recommend you withdraw them promptly.
I asked “Do you not see how this exposes you to the charge of hypocrisy?” You bemoan the fact of being banned at Uncommon Descent, ARN, EvC, Dawkins blog, Pharyngula, Pandas Thumb, AtBC etc for no good reason and yet you have banned a poster here who hardly merited the sanction. I wonder that you do not see the irony.
With regard to “put forward the case of evolutionary biology”, I am happy to qualify the phrase with mainstream or neo-Darwinian.
Folks, we have a very curious situation here. Alan Fox who co-controls this blog and could destroy it in a heartbeat if he chose, is also a great admirer of Richard Dawkins, a man I regard as a charlatan. Alan bemoans my banishment of Woot, whoever that is, when I gave Woot every opportunuty to apologize for the uncivilized way he had treated Martin. Woot also called me “Dude” which I regard as derogatory. Woot contributed absolutely nothing to this blog.
Also I am not in the least interested in what others may think about me. They have already expressed their sentiments by baning me from nearly all their forums, some, like Uncommon Descent, three times! I invite everyone to come here and participate and ask only that they remain civil, something Woot was unwilling to do. A civil Darwinian is as rare as hen’s teeth as any observer of internet blogs will surely agree. They degrade their adversaries, ban them from their intellectual ghettos, and treat them with contempt in every conceivable fashion. For a current example, go to After The Bar Closes, and examine the way they treat Salvador Cordova, a Christian gentleman. Incidentally, I am now contributing to his new forum -Young Cosmos.
I know all about it. As they say -
“been there, done that.”
I do not regard neoDarwinism as “mainstream.” It never was anything but the necessary posture of a congenital atheist mentality. The Darwinian model is a dismal failure which has never produced anything more than the elaboration of intraspecific varieties and subspecies all of which are dead ends. Natural selection never had anything to do with either the emergence of a new life form or its subsequent history as a species. All it ever did was prevent evolutionary change for as long as possible, ensuring the ultimate extinction of the vast majority of all the life forms that were ever produced.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”.
I also remind Alan Fox and everyone else that, true to my word, I did not delete any of Woot’s comments which on review I still find to be largely derogatory toward both Martin and myself. I will remove NO comments, even obscene ones which I savor the most. They are the ones that best reflect a person’s true character. The comments will remain even when their source is long gone. That is the way it is supposed to be, the way it was “prescribed” to be, the way it has always been as history invariably testifies. Just remember, those who come here to insult and defame -
“What happens in cyberdumb stays in cyberdumb.”
John A. Davison
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://expelledthemovie.com/blog/2007/09/28/come-on-guys%e2%80%a6you-can-do-better-than-that/#comment-6089
I offer this to establish that I am spreading my convictions elsewhere as well as here.
In # 625 I requested a list of professed atheists who have contributed anything of substance to our culture and so far not a single example has surfaced. I am surprised some Darwimp didn’t cough up Pharyngula Z. Myers or Christopher (hiccup) Hitchens or Dickie Dawkins of selfish gene fame. Why don’t they nominate themselves? I’ll tell you why. Because they would have to recognize my existence, something they are terrified to do – that is why!
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“Davison is the Darwinians’ worst nightmare.”
Terry Trainor
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Speaking of banishment, the subject of this thread, neither Sal Cordova nor myself can speak at “After The Bar Closes,” but that does not stop the animals there from speaking about us. I recommend the following page
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=479e398e5670f7e8;act=ST;f=14;t=5144;st=720
especially the comments by some cowardly nothing named Albatrossity2 in which I am described with -
“… despite his advancing age and obvious insanity…”
and
“…fellow wacko JAD…”
I submit that self-named Albatrossity 2, whoever that is, has placed an albatross around his own neck when the poor degenerate has to insult two minds, vastly superior to his own, in such an obvious display of the crass, monumentally vulgar, infantile manner that typifies “After The Bar Closes,” Wesley Elsberry’s “inner sanctum,” “our forum,” with P.Z. Myers’ “Pharyngula” the major last surviving bastions of Darwinian auto-delusion and frantic, last ditch desperation, both still vainly supporting the most tested and failed hypothesis in the history of descriptive and experimental science.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
If I am really regarded as Albatrossity 2 has described, wouldn’t more people want to visit this weblog to see what the senile old fool is saying these days? I am sure we have about the lowest visitor frequency of any blog in history. I will see if I can do something about that.
You know what I think would be a wonderful new feature of internet communication? Of course you don’t. I will tell you anyway. Maybe it already exists and I just don’t know about it. It would be the equivalent of Telephone Caller ID. That would be a nice way to see who is really interested in this blog rather than those just casually dropping by to see what the senile old fool is saying these days. It would also be a wonderful opportunity for me to thank visitors for expressing interest in my weblog don’t you know.
Can this be installed? Please advise.
Thanking you in advance,
John A. Davison
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Salvador Cordova introduced one of my favorite scientists, William Bateson, over at his Young Cosmos blog,
http://www.youngcosmos.com/blog/archives/190#comments
which gave me a chance to comment on that great scientist, a man the Darwinians have always deliberately and cynically ignored.
Read and enjoy!
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
It is appropriate that I issue invitations to my adversaries here on this thread dedicated to the question -
Why Banishment?
Each one of them has made it impossible for me to particpate in their forums. They are all welcome to come here and present their versions of what I regard as the most important unsolved aspect of organic evolution which is the mechanism by which it has been achieved,
That invitation includes those that deny evolution altogether. All be assured that they will not be muzzled or isolated or openly ridiculed, nor will their comments be deleted or edited in any way.
Here they are in no particular order.
P.Z. Myers of Pharyngula, Wesley Elsberry of Panda’s Thumb and After The Bar Closes, Richard Dawkins who is represented by RichardDawkins.net and William Dembski and Denyse O’Leary the co-sponsors of Uncommon Descent. I also invite those controlling EvC and ARN and would name them if I knew who they were. I also welcome their appointed delegates like DaveScot/David Springer of Uncommon Descent although I certainly would prefer the titular heads of the various forums.
One such delegate, Woot, who, I assume, represented P.Z. Myers, refused to behave in civil fashion resulting in the only banishment which has proved necessary. However his comments remain as will every other comment presented here by any user. Since profanity and vulgar denigration occurs routinely now on internet blogs, I will even allow that to stand as permanent testimony to the character of those that must resort to those methods. This is a form of passive resistance I suppose but it beats denying participation entirely as I am sure all will agree.
Surely those who hold strong positions concerning our origins cannot refuse this opportunity to present those positions here in a forum specifically designed for just that purpose. That invitation includes the matter of global warming as well, which I have presented with great concern.
Now that I have formally issued these invitations, I will consider the responses or lack of same as an experiment testing the sincerity of my adversaries on both sides of the debate, a debate which I continue to maintain has no place in science. The truth has never been decided by debate or opinion, or by which petitiion has the most signatures, or by which forum has the most users or visitors, or by any other human convention. Facts alone describe the real world.
Galileo, the father of the scientific method, put it this way -
“Facts which at first seem improbable will, even on scant explanation, drop the cloak which has hidden them and stand forth in naked and simple beauty.”
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I will look for signs that my invitations have been recognized on the various blogs and will be disapppointed if they do not appear.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable”
In my message # 18 I asked about the possibility of installing a visitor ID identification system. Can anyone throw any light on this possibility? I think it could be a valuable step up from the cowardly methods that still prevail when every low life in the world can drop by and then sneak back where he came from undetected. It is bad enough dealing with anonymous cowards and those who manage to gain access through subterfuge like Woot.
When I visit hate tanks like Pharyngula and After The Bar Closes, I come away sick to my stomach. They offer absolutely nothing to the subject they profess to understand so perfectly. They don’t even mention their precious “Natural Selection” any more and I know why. It is because it never had anything to do with evolution except to stabilize the species and delay progressive ascending change for as long as possible. Now it can’t even do that anymore because the game is over, the goal posts have been torn down and the fans have all left the stadium. All that remains is extinction.
I ask for one constructive suggestion that has originated from the intellectual cesspools of P.Z. Myers’ Pharyngula or Wesley Elsberry’s Panda’s Thumb and After The Bar Closes. Both blogs have degenerated to the point where all they do is attack anyone who would dare take exception to their hollow creeds, creeds they no longer even dare mention because they finally realize they are useless. Pharyngula is little more than an atheist recruiting station and online store for the sale of atheist engraved paraphenalia ranging from coffee mugs to bumper stickers, all adorned with the Big Red A. I wonder what they do with the profits which must be considerable judging from the size of the wildly cheering entourage that Myers has at his beck and call. At least there is method in Myers’ madness. With Dawkins and Hitchens it is obviously the conversion of the entire intellectual community to International Atheism.
“Atheists of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your Christianity.”
after Karl Marx
The animals at Panda’s Thumb and After The Bar Closes have no goal that I can discern beyond seeing who can best insult the IDists at Uncommon Descent, especially DaveScot, Denyse O’Leary and William Dembski, their favorite victims. They have special threads reserved for their targets which now also include Salvador Cordova, a Christian gentleman. They encapsulate their denigrations, each contributor adding his vitriol to that of his predecessor in a frantic game of “can you top this?”
What I find very revealing is their failure to mention John A. Davison and this blog in their hateful commentary. I think I know why. Elsberry doesn’t like to have my name mentioned and his flock hesitate to offend their master. I feel neglected and now request a special thread just for me such as they already have for others. I predict it won’t happen because -
“Discretion is the better part of valor.”
Shakespeare
and
“Davison is the Darwinians’ worst nightmare.”
Terry Trainor
The best proof of the cowardice of both Myers and Elsberry is their refusal to acknowledge this weblog, the only one to my knowledge that welcomes anyone to present his version of the mechanism by which evolution took place. Those who believe it is still in progress steadfastly refuse to appear just like those who believe it never happened at all. It is all very revealing.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=76#001139
Please visit the above and follow the link to “Elsberry’s last stand,” his “inner sanctum,” “our forum,” “The Slippery Floors Saloon,” also known as “After The Bar Closes,” where Panda’s Thumb’s effete elite meet in constant open session to contribute absolutely nothing of value in any form of rational discourse.
It is hard t believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable,a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=76#001141
Here is some light reading for any Myers fans who may drop by.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=77#001143
Digest this display of P.Z. Myers at his most repulsive best. What is really scary is the 212 comments that he has already generated.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undmemonstrable.”
Since this thread is about banishment and I am probabably the most thoroughly banished person involved in the so-called “debate,” a word I feel has no place in science, I will take this opportunity to offer my appraisal of some of those that must use banishment as the way they deal with their adversaries. So this can be seen as the response of the banishee (to coin a word) to the banisher (which may not be a word either).
Let me begin by saying I am not one of those, and have only baned one contributor, not because of his scientific views, but only for his lack of civil behavior. His science, if you can call it that, remains in perpituity as far as I am concerned. So it will always be on this blog for so long as it exists.
I will begin with P.Z. Myers, the second biggest bully in cyberspace, who has the distinction of hosting the most popular blog in cyberspace. He is a man who recently celebrated his fiftieth birthday, an event immortalized by hearty congratulations from fellow atheist Richard Dawkins. At fifty, a scientist should be at the height of his powers, doing his most significant work. This raises the question – just what is Myers doing now and what has he been doing for the past several years that has anything to do with science which is the search for the truth? I think I can safely answer that question with the words – “absolutely nothing.” Like his mentor Richard Dawkins he too has completely abandoned the experimental laboratory for which his training prepared him to dedicate all his energies to the denigration of all forms of organized religion and to the recruitment of as many followers as possible to the goal of International Atheism.
This raises the question – why would a scientist ever feel compelled to devote the best years of his life to such a hopeless project? Surely he must realize that he is not going to be able to overthrow Christianity, the basis of all of Western Civilization. What then are his motives? What can he possibly hope to achieve?
I believe I can answer this question. Like all enlightened Darwinians, Myers now realizes that the neoDarwinian model is a miserable failure. It can accomplish nothing more than what Darwin originally claimed for it, the elaboration of intraspecific varieties like his pigeons and his celebrated Galapagos finches, neither of which have achieved species transformation either in the experimental laboratory or in nature. The Darwinians don’t even test their silly hypothesis any more. They are ashamed to because they know it is without foundation. They don’t even mention it any more, finally realizing that all the selection in the world cannot influence the appearance of a new organic structure, something Mivart knew in Darwin’s own day.
Rather than abandon the most failed hypothesis in the history of science and accept the only possible alternative which was a guided, ascending evolution, through mindless pride and congenital predisposition, Myers and Dawkins have heedlessly and compulsively painted themselves into a caged corner from which they cannot possibly escape.
It is a terrible waste of otherwise fine minds, minds hamstrung, probably genetically, and accordingly destined to intellectual, moral and ethical oblivion. The internet is rife with such creatures. Einstein also recognized such stereotypes in his day and commented on them -
“It is abhorrent to me when a fine intelligence is paired with an unsavory character.”
We are all victims in a determined universe. Some of us have been more fortunate than others.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
“They can run but they can’t hide.”
Joe Louis
Oh but they can Joe. That is exactly what they do, what they have always done!
To be continued.
I also believe that both P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins are showing unmistakable signs of incipient nervous breakdowns. To spew such hate is not the mark of a healthy mind.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/01/was_that_fun_or_what.php#comments
This is the thread to which I recently referred at “brainstorms.” It has now produced 299 commments. What is the record for comments on a thread at Pharyngula?
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
318 and still climbing, mostly anal/vaginal. Pee Zee has a real classy following!
I love it so!
328 this morning. Is this a record for Pharyngula?
I now continue my appraisal of P.Z. Myers, his personality, his methods and his purposes.
He takes great delight in the denigration of some of our most prominent publlc figures. Here are some recent examples.
“Do we really care what the Pope thinks any more?” ( he also refers to the Holy Father as “bennie.”)
“Asshole-in -chief” (referring to the President.)
“Mike Huckabee is a wretched ignoramus” and “Huckabee is a raving lunatic” and “How bad could Huckabee be?”
“He turns everything he touches to dross.” ( Ben Stein) and “No respect for Ben Stein.”
It goes on an on, as many as 10 threads per day, nearly all derogatory.
Here is a key one that reveals the real Myers -
“Blasphemy is always good for a laugh.”
Truer words were never spoken. Pee Zee has become a kind of sick insult comedian who has discovered the secret of attracting equally sick followers in record setting numbers.
Why must he do this? I will tell you why. He has to because, with Dawkins, he now realizes that his precious Darwinian universe is a dismal failure. Having nothing to offer in its stead, he now has no other recourse than to to do everything in his power to destroy all that is good, virtuous and optimistic in the world. As a homozygous, “born that way” atheist, he is incapable of accepting a planned universe even as that is the only conceivable alternative to godless Darwinism.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
To be continued.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/01/was_that_fun_or_what.php#comments
Pee Zee’s thread has now reached 366 comments which must please him very much.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
368 on this date, It is now no longer on the first page and has disappeared south into oblivion like every other thread that Myers has ever produced, not one of which ever had anything to do with the only matter that has ever been in question – the mechanism of a long past organic evolution.
“Out of sight, out of mind.”
“Aren’t our plants, our animals lacking some mechanisms which were present in the early flora and fauna?
Pierre Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms, page 71.
They certainly are Pierre.
I hope my readers will forgive me for conversing with the greatest French zoologist of his generation. My contemporaries pretend I do not exist, making dialogue quite impossible!
Grasse epitomizes good science. He asks questions. When did one last hear a Darwinian ask a significant question about evolutionary matters? The last I can recall was when Theodosius Dobzhansky asked the question – Can the most intensive selection transform Drosophila melanogaster into a new species? The result was a resounding no. Nevertheless, Dobzhansky remained a devout Darwinian, one of the most remarkable conclusions in all of experimental science.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
To be continued.
Sure enough, still 368 now that the thread is no longer current and visible.
“Out of sight, out of mind.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/12/in_case_youve_been_wondering_a.php#more
My favorite from Myers is this one in which he describes Martin and I in his trademark anal, fecal terms. Read it in its glorious entirety and ask yourself the question as I did – Is this man mentally sound? I especially relish these excerpts -
“…the preening duo of the obtuse JAD and his talking hemorrhoid, VMartin.”
“…he’s found an environment enriched with the feculent putridity of Ben Stein’s compost…”
“Not recommended, but presented as a public notification of the whereabouts of one of the dumbest people on the internet.”
It is a great tragedy that the University of Minnesota continues to tolerate this wholesale abuse of the rights afforded by the Constitution of the United States. It has most certainly alienated this alumnus. I predict that he cannot last much longer as his atheist Darwinian world collapses around him.
Well Professor Myers, I strongly recommend this reprinting of your anal compulsive commentary for every thinking person to consume, digest and, with me, be forced to reach the only possible conclusion that you are a miserable excuse for a human being. Thanks for making that possible and please resume your hateful “ejaculations.” They are music to my ancient ears!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
“Pigs is pigs.”
anonymous
Speaking of banishment, my supporters, Daniel Smith and Martin have both been denied participation on “brainstorms” forum. Fortunately they are still able to avoid banishment at “After the Bar Closes,” Wesley Elsberry’s “inner sanctum.”
The following link is a wonderful demonstration of how Daniel Smith has made fools of Wesley Elsberry and his herd of illiterate animals. Note the inane comment by Elsberry himself. He must be getting desperate.
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=47a7e6dd112838e2;act=ST;f=14;t=5199;st=1410
Read and enjoy as I have!
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a ;present evolution undemonstrable.”
I have copied this whole thread to “brainstorms,” Ben Stein’s blog and “Young Cosmos” and so informed P.Z. Myers. I hope someone who can would do the same for me for the consumption of the animals at Panda’s Thumb, After The Bar Closes, Pharyngula and EvC, the last surviving strongholds of the biggest joke in the history of science. Maybe Martin or Daniel Smith would be so kind.
“The best defense is to be as offensive as possible.”
John A. Davison
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable”
Oh yes – and Uncommon Descent as well.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/john-davison-challenges-pz-myers-to-a-debate/#comments
The plot thickens as DaveScot is also trying to provoke P. Z. Myers into a confrontation with me. It will never happen of course. Myers is a congenital coward! So is DaveScot. Most bullies are.
I love it so!
http://reasonablekansans.blogspot.com/2007/01/pz-myers-co.html
Here is another interesting demonstration of P.Z. Myers at his degenerate best.
I love it so!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
There are two relatively new products on the market that P. Z. Myers should seriously consider as detoxifying agents – KINOKI and BOWTOL. Use Google to find out more about these wonderful new products.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/now_i_know_how_jesse_james_fel.php#comments
Well it happened. Pharyngula Zed Myers finally acknowledged my existence and his entourage of mostly anonymous animals are shouting their approval of his cowardly dismissal of me as a quack.
I liked # 53, and a few other dissenters, but most of it was the usual anal compulsive drivel that has become the trademark of both Myers and his like minded, congenitally defective followers.
There is nothing that can be done for any of them because -
“Everything is determined… by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
and
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
To be continued.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/now_i_know_how_jesse_james_fel.php#comments
The most interesting feature of Myers’ introduction is in the little P.S. he introduces just before the comments begin. He warns his “drooling animals” NOT to mention my name. Myers also doesn’t seem to know the difference between a “debate” and a “confrontation.” I wouldn’t dream of “debating” anyone. Scientists don’t “debate,” they “discover,” and then they “publish” their “discoveries.” That is what science has always been about, nothing more, nothing less.
Just what has Myers ever published on the only subject which has ever been in question – the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution?
****ABSOLUTELY NOTHING****
Neither has Richard Dawkins. Dawkins just THINKS he has. I can safely say that no Darwinian, past or present, ever published a word dealing with the factors responsible for the appearance of even one organism of the millions that have come and mostly gone in the history of the earth, not one.
The reason for this is very simple. The causes of organic evolution are not subject to discovery yet and perhaps may never be. What has been “discovered” are the following.
1. No contemporary organism of which we are aware is competent to become a new true species as defined by Dobzhansky.
2. Mendelian genetics has played no role in speciation or in the generation of any of the higher categories.
3. Both sexual reproduction and natural selection PREVENT creative evolution and are instrumental in ensuring extinction.
4. Phylogeny, like ontogeny still is, WAS driven entirely from within, with the ONLY role for environment being to provide the physico-chemical milieu allowing that process to take place.
5. By far the most important thing that has been “discovered” is that the atheist Darwinian mentality is congenitally incompetent to properly interpret the natural world. They are helpless victims of their “prescribed” fate to be “perfect losers” in the lottery of life. P.Z. Myers is a living example of that most important “discovery.”
“We seek and offer ourselves to be gulled.”
Montaigne
“Study Nature, not books.”
Louis Agassiz
“Everything is determined… by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/now_i_know_how_jesse_james_fel.php#comments
Actually things are starting to look up with some of the recent comments there. I wonder how much longer Myers will allow this thread to continue. It will soon be off the front page anyway like all his hateful mouthings. I wish he would reprint my last comment. How about it P.Z.? I know you are watching. I’ll be looking for it.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/now_i_know_how_jesse_james_fel.php#comments
It looks like the comments there have pretty much stabilized at 129. I especially enjoyed “those pesky darwinists,” whoever that is!
Any publicity is good publicity. I was hoping for a lot more.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/american_atheists_all_over_the.php#comments
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/american_atheists_all_over_the.php#comments
I call your attention to this thread from P.Z. Myers announcing the upcoming meeting of the American Atheists in Minneapolis Minnesota. Why do you suppose they are meeting in Minnesota? I will tell you why. It is because one of the most influential spokespersons for Universal Atheism is a faculty member of the University of Minnesota. That is why, and that is the only reason. What other American educational institution can boast such a prominent figure? Under his guidance, Pharyngula has become a powerful force for the atheist cause. This man is far more dangerous than Ward Churchill. He is a biologist, presumably a scientist, who, at fifty, has completely abandoned his profession to become one of the leading enemies of everything this great nation stands for. He makes Richard Dawkins look like Mother Teresa.
He attacks not only all religious institutions but the Republic itself, describing the President of the United Sates as “asshole-in-chief.” He lashes out at anyone and everyone that happens to be on the current scene. He is completely consumed with himself. He idolizes himself because he has no one else he respects. He even has trouble agreeing with fellow atheists Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins. No one escapes his vitriol. He has no heros, no sources, no models on which he can base his behavior. He is self generated, self annointed and ensconsed by a host of like minded deniers of all that is good and virtuous in the world.
The frightening part is his enormous following, mostly cowardly, anonymous nothings who, like himself, have never published a word on the only matter that has that has ever been in question, the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution. Like every other atheist Darwinian, unable any longer to defend the most failed hypothesis in the history of science, Myers, congenitally incapable of accepting the only other viable interpretation, a guided purposeful evolution, represents, in my opinion, an unleashed force doomed to contribute nothing of value either as a citizen or a scientist. It seems to me that he was “prescribed” to be a loser in the lottery of life. He will soon be forgotten, but not soon enough to suit this investigator.
“It is abhorrent to me when a fine intellgence is paired with an unsavory character.”
Albert Einstein
There now, I feel somewhat better.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
How do you like them apples PEE-ZEE baby? I hope they give you gas and the cramps!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
My recent comments below bear on the issue of banishment as well.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=78#001171
“Let my enemies destroy each other.”
Salvador Dali
“If you tell the truth, you can be certain, sooner or later, to be found out.”
Oscar Wilde
Since it relates to the substance of this thread I recommend my comment on the following link -
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=33164341&postID=9112485896800228676
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/a_transition_at_oxford.php#comments
This is great news. Dawkins is retiring from Oxford’s faculty. Now if we can only get P.Z. Myers to do the same and give up his position at the University of Minnesota at Morris.
What is really hilarious is the way the animals at Pharyngula are suggesting that Myers replace Dawkins at Oxford.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/prophecy.php#comments
Be sure to enjoy this free publicity for me and this blog.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
l Iove it so!
Also follow my tally of the above thread at the following -
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=79#001175
This is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
Speaking of selective banishment, my papers have been restored on the side bar at Uncommon Descent, but I am still unable to comment freely there or defend them in any way. I have no password.
I recently received an email from David Springer inviting me to participate at Uncommon Descent but with the following qualifications. David Springer has created a “contibutor membership” in my name. I was intrigued by this and soon found out that the “devil is in the details.”
Springer explains – “As a contributor you can write articles under your own name and manage the comments. Any articles you write are saved as draft copies. An administrator has to approve the draft for publishing. If you want to write articles email me to get your drafts published. As long as it’s about science and isn’t offensive to evangelicals it’ll get published. A notable exception is the global warming topic. Dembski and I both believe it’s based on consensus science and I think you will agree science is not a democracy where the truth is determined by a majority…”
Without going further into the details, Springer indicated that if I did not comply he would remove my papers from the side bar.
Here is the substance of my response.
“The most remarkable aspect of your offer is the conditions it entails. I must not mention global warming and if I don’t comply with certain conditions, you will (for the third time) remove my papers from the side bar? Do I properly understand you? If so it is blackmail pure and simple and I will have no part of it.
Don’t you realize that what you, Dembski or I ‘believe’ means nothing in the world of science? If you have an ounce of decency you will leave my papers on the side bar whether I agree to your terms or not. That is my position and my response. I also made it indelibly clear that I would return to Uncommon Descent if Dembski asked me to and if I was given certain guarantees that I would never be summarily removed ever again. Do you think I was not serious?
I hadn’t noticed that my papers were back. I will look for them. If they remain there I will be delighted to reconsider your offer. I think they should once again be opened for commentary by those who are still allowed to speak at Uncommon Descent.
(portion deleted)
How in God’s name can you expect me to trust you or anyone else to speak freely with our history when you superimpose potential censorship on every word I might write?
(portion deleted)
To a subsequent email I responded in part as follows -
“…Also I want nothing from you other than the opportunity to comment on your forum. That is all I ever wanted. If you or Dembski or anyone else think they can control me in any way they are very sadly mistaken. I recommend you supply me with a password…”
I still have no password and don’t expect to get one.
I will be happy to forward the entire exchange to anyone who requests it in an email to me.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
It is hard for me to imagine anyone so self-absorbed, so arrogant, so unprincipled, and so out of touch with reality as to expect this old physiologist to get sucked into an arrangement such as DaveScot/David Springer has proposed.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
It is all about control folks. We have egomaniacs running internet forums, each one trying to gather the largest following, chalk up the greatest number of hits, while at the same time preventing any dissent, whatever it takes. Statistics are all that matter to these people. They have no principles, no code of ethical behavior. Their only goal is numerical superiority, something that can be presented monthly in graphic fashion demonstrating that their blog is better than any of the others. It is a numbers game, nothing more and nothing less.
Why the hell any forum would waste time attacking the Darwinian hoax is beyond me. It feeds the atheist elements to respond in kind, prolonging this idiotic debate and contributing absolutely nothing to our understanding of the great mystery of organic evolution. We have opposed forces wasting their time denigrating one another in a mindless war of words. The truth of the matter is that there is no place for a living God in evolutionary science just as there is no place in it for chance.
“Let my enemies destroy each other.”
Salvador Dali
Let us pray.
It is obvious to me at it was to Robert Broom that there was a Plan, a word he capitalized.
“Those who consider that all the strange course of evolution is the result of an accident, or a series of accidents, are quite at liberty to think so. I believe there is a Plan, and though in the slow course of evolution there have been ups and downs, and what look like mistakes, the plan has gone on; and we may feel sure that it cannot fail to meet its goal.”
Findng the Missing Link, page 108.
The atheist Darwnian mystics never forgave Broom for that declaration and they will never forgive me for sharing it. That is the way it was “determined” to be, “prescribed” to be. That suits me just fine. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
I believe the Plan has met its goal which was the emergence of Homo sapiens as the terminal product of a planned and now fully realized evolutionary sequence. The only future I forsee is progressisve decay, a decay already in progress as man abandons the Judeo-Christian ethic that made possible the great fiowering of Western Civilization. The Age of Technolgy, the final product of that flowering, has become our greatest enemy, leading, in my opinion, to our ultimate destruction not only as a civilization but possibly even as a species, one that will never be replaced.
“Everything is determined… by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
“If you tell the truth, you can be certain, sooner or later, to be found out.”
Oscar Wilde
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A. Davison
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-isnt-all-life-extinct/#comments
DaveScot/David Springer introduced this thread at Uncommon Descent. I emailed him indicating I have an explanation for why some forms have not become extinct and would be happy to present it if he would only give me a password to comment on any thread I pleased at Uncommon Descent. I also asked him to open my papers for comment and to allow me freely to respond to comments there as well. The only thing I ever wanted from Uncommon Descent was the opportunity that is offered to just about everyone else. I am going to follow how he responds to me and report here on this thread appropriately named “WHY BANISHMENT? I am not on trial.Those who have baned me from their “closed union shops” are the ones on trial.They always have been!
I am sick and tired of being kicked around and treated with contempt by those who have not earned my respect. From now on everything will become a matter of record on this blog and little will be left to the imagination.
Trust me.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Not surprisingly there has been no response from Springer. Imagine, if you can, an author whose papers once were available for discussion, a discussion now closed not only to the author but to everyone else as well. That is Uncommon Descent. It is obvious to me that Uncommon Descent is afraid of little old John A. Davison.
Let me also add that none of the discussion on the “Why Isn’t All Life Extinct” thread has anything to do with the question Springer has introduced. He would rather wield power rather than let a real scientist offer his input.
I long ago warned Dembski about this man and how he was not doing his forum any good. He has chosen to ignore me and he continues to pay the price for that decision. That suits me fine too.
“It is abhorrent to me when a fine intelligence is paired with an unsavory character.”
Albert Einstein
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Since this continues to be the least popular weblog of which I am aware, I am now prepared to offer an explanation for that curious state of affairs..
It is because it is the most tolerant. Anyone can comment here, and that is simply unacceptable to the average blog hound.
You see, one of the basic features of human nature is the requirement to loathe something or someone. That is the key to popularity. There is “strength in numbers.” That feature serves to automatically attract fellow loathers in an autocatalytic cascade which leads to ever increasing numbers. It is so evident in such extremely popular “forums” like After The Bar Closes and Pharyngula where everyone is united in their shared loathing of anyone who would dream of questioning the Darwinian hoax. Fundamentalists attract fellow Fundamentalists, Darwinians fellow Darwinians, atheists attract atheists. All these conditions have demonstrable congenital bases. Man is a social animal and will instinctively join with those who share his particular brand of loathing. That is what produced the Klu Klux Klan, The John Birch Society, The American Atheist Society, The Flat Earth Society (now defunct), The Discovery Institute, A Christian Organization, Uncommon Descent, the list goes on and on. You show me a popular weblog or forum and I will show you a “groupthinktank,” no exceptions. It is gloriously revealing. The more they are unified the more intolerant they become.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
Truer words were never spoken.
The problem with this blog is that I am neither a Darwinian nor a Fundamentalist and there are apparently not a large number of us. My brand of Creationism is not shared with many and perhaps with none judging from the Popularity Index (P.I) which is reflected in two ways. One is the number of visitors and the other is the number of commenters, both statistics for which this weblog is woefully lacking. There is also a clear inverse relationship between tolerance and popularity. “Brainstorms” forum remained until recently one of the most tolerant of all internet forums and one of the least popular as a result. I am still allowed to speak there but only my adversaries can respond. I still can’t understand it.
There is another related feature that influences the popularity of a forum. People love to see their adversaries abused. It is reminiscent of the Romans killing Christians in the Coliseum. That is what makes banishment such a gratifying feature for the clientele of such bastions of intolerance as Uncommon Descent where DaveScot/David Springer has banned more poor souls than any other blog czar in history. Certain other blogs have more exquisite forms of torture for those who do not share their ideology. EvC has, or at least had, “Boot Camp” where intractable commenters were supposed to learn how to “debate.” After The Bar Closes relegates nonbelievers to “The Bathroom Wall.” In my case I was given further special treatment with “Davison’s Soap Box.” EvC “Showcased” me and baned me from comment on any other thread, a banishment still in effect. At Uncommon Descent I just got repeatedly removed, along with all my papers, typically for the slightest of reasons and “Professor Davison is no longer with us.” Springer apparently needs that to maintain his status, his ego and his image as “blog czar extraordinaire.”
Of course the only thing that should matter is the quality of a forum which I will identify as F.Q. (no insult intended). I define the popularity index (P.I) as the product of visitor numbers and comment participation per week. Tolerance to the views of others is expressed as T.I. (tolerance index). It seems to me that tolerance inhibits comments while intolerance promotes them. This allows me now to present a statement relating these quantities with a very simple mathematical expression -
F.Q. = K ( T.I. / P.I. )
By the above criterion this weblohg is of high quality. I expect it to remain that way.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
My comment deleted.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=80#001187
To avoid repitition I link to my comment edited today at 16:26.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/america_slouching_towards_the.php#comments
Be sure to visit this thread where P.Z. Myers is gleefully celebrating, with his adoring, congenitally disadvantaged clients, the decay of religion in America.
“He loves it so!”
“It is easy to believe isn’t it?”
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Speaking of a low Popularity Index (P.I.), the mark of Forum Quality (F.Q.) as set forth in my message #60, this blog is now managing around 8 hits per day, making it one of the most significant weblogs of all time!
Remember -
F.Q. = K ( T.I. / P.I. )
The lower the popularity, the higher the quality. That makes sense to me! If you want to waste your time by joining a herd, I recommend Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, RichardDawkins.net and Uncommon Descent. They are crawling with intolerance, popularity and “groupthink.”
Incidentally, “groupthink” (GT) = K ( P.I. )
Isn’t mathematics fun?
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
They sure do Miguel. They still do!
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/now-this-is-interesting-pielke-on-dr-joanne-simpson/#comment-6660
As you can see, I just managed to “penetrate” another “groupthinktank,” crawling, as usual, with unfulfilled, anonymous “blogbullies.” “Watts Up” now joins with Pharyngula, After The Bar Closes, Panda’s Thumb, ARN, EvC and RichardDawkins.net. The only difference is they haven’t baned me yet. They will. I invited them here as I have everyone else.
I love it so!
“Mankind fiddles while earth burns.”
My sitemeter just informed me that we are now averaging 28 visits per day. Hoorah! What other weblog can boast such evidence of high quality? That “we” is the editorial “we” by the way. We is me or, more grammatically correct, we is I.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Speaking of popularity versus quality, the following link establishes beyond doubt which is the most popular weblog in history.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/am_i_a_gorilla_or_an_elephant.php#comments
Also note the unrestrained delight with which P.Z. Myers describes his unparalleled popularity. His perfect self-absorption exceeds that even of DaveScot/David Springer.
The moral of the story is if you want to be popular, completely abandon science to become a “godless liberal” and attack every institution with principles from the Boy Scouts right up to the President of the United States and the Holy Father of the Catholic Church. It is the key to weblog immortality. It is a winner!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Spreaking of banishment, I have just been baned from the following forum.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/02/the_wit_and_wisdom_of_john_dav.php
and cannot respond to Ed Brayton’s final comment in which he reveals himself so perfectly as he uses the F word with unrestrained abandon.
I love it so!
“Pigs is pigs.”
Anonymous
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I just ran into a wonderful statement relating to the intolerance that is so characteristic of internet blogs and forums. Oddly it is from a novel about international intrigue.
“Show me an unsolved mystery, and I’ll show you a certified weirdo with all the answers.”
Night Probe! by Clive Cussler, page 228.
“Men believe most what they least understand.”
Montaigne
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/02/the_wit_and_wisdom_of_john_dav.php
I was just readmitted by Ed Brayton. I invited him and all his cronies to come here and present their insults. I assured them that whatever they say will remain as a permanent record of their feelings. I have yet to delete a single comment from any commenter and have no plans to do so in the future. What other weblog can promise as much? None that I know of.
I bet that they will not show. Intellectual cowards are like that wherever one finds them.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
and they do not like to leave their coops.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable .”
I really cherish my insults. I mean the ones I have received, as they are the best measure of the character of my adversaries. Accordingly I have decided to use this message # 71 as an ongoing source of some of my favorite denigrations. I will bring it up to date as time and opportunity allows. There are literally thousands of insults that have been and continue to be heaped upon me and I couldn’t begin to list them all so I will present only my favorites.
I will start the roll with the incomparable P.Z. Myers of Pharyngula.
“Your stench has preceeded you.”
“…preening duo of JAD and his talking hemorrhoid VMartin.”
“…one of the dumbest people on the internet.”
“At last he’s found an environment enriched with the feculent putridity of Ben Stein’s compost which allows his inanity to grow and flourish, reinforced by the ripe goofiness of other creationists.”
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Ed Brayton of Dispatches From The Culture Wars -
“DaveScot says John Davison is a nut and says Dembski thinks so too.”
“Okay Davison, step away from the crackpipe. Just put it down and walk away.”
“Exactly what universe does Davison inhabit?”
“No one has deleted any of your responses, you moron.”
“Christ you are stupid.”
“….you f*****g idiot.”
From W. Kevin Vicklund at the same blog -
“I believe I have figured out what the mental midget is babbling about.”
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jeff Alberts at Watts Up With That?
“…but now I think he’s just a real loon. Correction, I KNOW he’s a real loon.”
“You are one paranoid person. PLEASE take your medication! For our sake!
“He’s already lost his mind, so his replies and our replies to him serve no purpose. Boot him off.”
“You’re a hypocrite, plain and simple.”
Rob at the same same weblog.
“He doesn’t know crap about global warming or evolution.”
(I wonder if this is the same Rob that insulted me here. I bet it is!)
Earle Williams at the same weblog.
“….this unfulfilled snotbag.”
Bruce Cobb at the same weblog.
“Senile, bipolar, forgot to take his meds.”
“I say boot the senile bipolar royal loon snotbag believer in Gaia, aka Johnny “the debate is over” Davison.”
and indigo, whoever that is.
“…you are just a petite fart…”
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
C.J. O’Brien at After The Bar Closes.
“Davison is a crackpot.”
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Rob Coeman right here on this weblog.
“Write this down. you are a crackpot.”
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DaveScot/David Springer at “brainstorms” forum.
“Izzat u, John? http://www.t-shirthumor.com/Merchant2/graphics/fullsize/tein_lg.gif
“You have learned your lessons well, grasshopper.”
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jim Anderson at Decorabilia.
http://decorabilia.blogspot.com/2005/12/davison-crack-up-continues.html
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
If you would like to have your name and comments removed from this list, all you have to do is present a formal apology here and on the site where the the comments originated. I am very forgiving. I don’t expect to see many apologies as “loathing” of others seems to be a basic feature of the human condition, especially for those who inhabit internet fan clubs and other mutual admiration societies. Nevertheless, your apology will remain as testimony to your recovery from whatever it was that made you what you were. That will become a separate list.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
“Mankind fiddles while earth burns.”
http://timesonline.typepad.com/faith/2008/03/archbishop-of-c.html
I ran into this at P.Z. Myers’ Pharyngula and I am inclined to agree with the Archbishop. Neither atheist Darwinism nor literal Biblical Creationism provide any insight into the mysteries of phylogeny and ontogeny.
Nevertheless, to deny supernatural intervention, as the Darwinians continue to do, is completely unacceptable and at variance with undeniable reality. Since life MUST have been created one or more times, the Genesis account comes much closer to reality than does the Darwinian notion that it was all an accident. If created only once, then life MUST have been redirected many many times. I do not regard these conclusions as negotiable. The notion of spontaneous biogenesis has not only been proven to be false, first by Redi, then Spallanzani and finally Pasteur, but is absurd on the face of it.
My position throughout has been that there is neither tangible evidence for a personal living God, nor need for one. That does not mean that such a God does not now exist. All that is required and cannot be denied is that one or more such entitites once did.
It is fitting that this message should appear on the WHY BANISHMENT? thread as it offers an explanation for why I have been excluded not only from all the several Darwinian weblogs but from Uncommon Descent as well.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=82#001225
This latest from P.Z. Meyers’ Pharyngula should be read by every rational observer of the natural world.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A. Davison
I commented the whole story about doctor Myers eviction from the movie at Pharyngula’s thread “Expelled”.
Of course it lasted there only for 20 minutes and it was put into the Bathroom wall as “graffity”. Neodarwinists stick together like brave soldiers.
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=47e3ce9b84699522;act=ST;f=14;t=1272;st=5550
Thank you Martin. I can’t even present a comment at After The Bar Closes any more: or at Pharyngula, Uncommon Descent, EvC, ARN, RichardDawkins.net etc.etc.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=82#001225
I have been keeping a tally on the responses to P.Z. Myers commentary above. As of this hour there have been 0ne-thousand-one hundred and seventy-nine (1179) comments!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“S’wonderful! – s’marvelous!”
Ira Gershwin
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Not quite sure what your point is, John? Is all this new publicity PZ is getting a good thing or a bad thing, in your view?
Alan
Thanks for asking.
It is testimony to the great popularity that an atheist Darwinian has managed to attract. It is nothing more and nothing less. Dawkins also has a huge following and for the same reason.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
I repeat my prediction that by next February, Panda’s Thumb, After The Bar Closes, RichardDawkins.net and Pharyngula will all have become embarrassing footnotes in the history of evolutionary science. I say exactly the same thing with respect to all those who deny catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Those that adhere to either position will be as scarce as hen’s teeth.
Just as all of evolution was determined millions of years ago, so was the physical history of the planet. The two are closely linked aspects of the same predestined sequence, a sequence now in its terminal phase. It was the appearance of Homo sapiens that resulted in this, the last chapter of a planned, ascending evolution, doomed from the beginning to the ultimate destruction of the civilization that he produced.
I am not alone in this assessment.
“And so there has been little reason for this blindness, except perhaps an unwillingness to look such horror in the face and say, ‘You are my creation.’”
Tim Flannery. The Weather Makers, page 210
Those are my convictions. I thought I had made it clear in my Wecome thread that I am an irreversible determinist. What others may think or how I am received means nothing to me. It hasn’t for some time now. Actually, it never has!
“I am in the prime of senility.”
Benjamin Franklin
“If you tell the truth, you can be certain, sooner or later, to be found out.”
Oscar Wilde
“Everything is determined…by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=82#001227
just posted at 14:00 hours on “brainstorms” forum.
add this one
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=82#001228
at 15:14
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=82#001231
3:48 AM today, March 24.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=83#001232
Just posted at “brainstorms” forum.
Speaking of banishment, several weeks ago I got fed up with the behavior of P.Z. Myers and wrote a letter of complaint to E.Thomas Sullivan, the Provost of the University of Minnesota. Incidentally, the University of Minnesota is my Ph.D. Alma Mater which I received in 1954.
Since I never received any response from Sullivan, I decided to appeal this time to the Board of Regents to do something to neutralize the disgusting behavior of Meyers as he continues to denigrate everything that is positive and virtuous in modern society. I also took advantage of P.Z.’s one way communication system to inform him of what I had done. It will be interesting to see if he will expose and ridicule my actions as he did when I complained to his Provost. I certainly hope he does, as he needs all the exposure that I am willing to give him. So does his equally pathetic atheist crony Richard Dawkins. I cannot believe that the members of the Board of Regents can all approve of the actions of this hostile, unethical, unprincipled member of the University of Minnesota faculty. He is an embarrassment to that institution and to this alumnus.
I will present any reponse I may receive.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
My friend and loyal supporter Martin has just informed me that he is being threatened with banishment from After The Bar Closes if he makes any more attempts to mention me or my papers.
Below is a current example of the sort of intellectual flotsam and jetsam that has always characterized Wesley Elsberry’s “Inner Sanctum,” “After The Bar Closes,” where his effete elite meet in constant open session to spew their hate against anyone who might question the most ludicrous, the most discredited, the most enduring hoax in the history of science. Note especially the unrestrained vitriol of Arden Chatfield who is stupid enough to use his real name!
Congratulations Wesley. You run a great forum!
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=47eb6f4180c22e93;act=ST;f=14;t=5188;st=390
That is the sort of thing that brings great joy to this old physiologist.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
So far I see no sign that Pharyngula Zed Meyers is interested in letting his congregation know that I have complained about him to the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota. I hope that someone who can still speak there will remind his flock of what a nasty, thoughtless person I really am!
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John,
Just as a point of information, may I clarify that Dr. Elsberry is a Christian and an active member of the United Methodist Church. You may not intend to, but are possibly giving the impression to your readers that this is not so.
I don’t see how a neodarwinist could be a Christian at the same time. Does he believe that all prophets are the result of natural selection? And that their common ancestor is an ancient fish? On the other hand does such a neodarwinist believe in the ressurection? I can’t grasp it.
John mentioned that I had been repeatedly warned not to post at AtBC ideas he had told me. I would say it is on the will of admin to make decision if the things I wrote is something I believe in or that I am only John Davison’s messenger at AtBC. I would like to add some ideas from Manifesto there to support my views but I am afraid I would be banned immidiately.
AtBCists behaviour is sometimes very despicable. The discussion is not moderated regarding abuses toward John and me. Even EvC forum which is run by hard-core neodarwinists doesn’t allow such kind of abuses and ban temporarily members who behave in such manner.
Anyway it is Alan’s credit I have been readmitted there after the false accusations.
Alan
Attendance at church does not a Christian make. What kind of Christian would tolerate the use of the F word and much worse which Elsberry promotes at After The Bar Closes? Elsberry’s “inner sanctum” is little more than a hate factory with Martin one of its favorite targets. Arden Chatfield is despicable by any standard. Most of the others are so cowardly they must use aliases.
Martin writes:
Anyway it is Alan’s credit I have been readmitted there after the false accusations.
I did not expect thanks. I am in favour of the free exchange of ideas. But, since you mention it, you’re welcome
John, you write:
What kind of Christian would tolerate…
Isn’t tolerance the essence of Christianity? What is so bad about the F word? My experience of the Americans I meet is that it is often the most used adjective and has lost its power to shock. BTW Arden Chatfield is an alias.
Of course the F word has lost its power to shock. That is exactly what is wrong with the liberal mentality. So now you tell me that Arden Chatfield is an alias. Thanks a lot Alan. Is there anyone at AtBC that actually uses his own name besides yourself of course? Don’t answer that question here by the way because I don’t want this idiotic exchange to continue. It accomplishes nothing. After The Bar Closes, all of Pharyngula, all of Panda’s Thumb and all of Richard Dawkins.net – none of these flame pits have anything whatsoever to do with the only matter which has ever been in question – the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution. All those “groupthinks” are is gossip factories whose participants play “can you top this” with one another in denigrating any departure from the biggest hoax in the history of science – godless, aimless Darwinian mysticism.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I introduce the following paragraph from Robert H. Bork’s book, “Slouching Towards Gomorrah” as it perfectly describes the positions taken by P.Z. Myers, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins.
“The major obstacle to religious renewal is the intellectual classes. who are highly influential and tend to regard religion as primitive superstition. They believe that science has left atheism as the only respectable intellectual stance. Freud, Marx, and Darwin, according to the conventional account, routed the believers. Freud and Marx are no longer taken as irrefutable by intellectuals, and now it appears to be Darwin’s turn to undergo a devaluation.”
page 294
This is of course a profoundly inadequate appraisal of the Darwinian paradigm. There is absolutely nothing in the Darwinian fantasy that ever had anything to do with creative evolution beyond the production of intraspecific varieties all of which were doomed to evolutionary stasis if not extinction.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I urge others to join me and email the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota to expess your appraisal of the posture, methods and purposes of P.Z, Myers as well. If that should fail to produce results, and it probably will fail, then I am prepared to initiate a petition calling for the revocaton of his tenure as a member of the University of Minnesota faculty. He makes Ward Churchill look like Mother Teresa. No State University should allow a member of its faculty to use that position to do everything in his power to destroy the Judeo-Christian ethic, the basis of Western Civilization. With his cronies, Hitchens and Dawkins, that is exactly what Myers is attempting and, as far as I can discern, he is succeeding famously. I have no intention of letting that success go unnoticed or without active response.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=83#001237
just presented.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable,”
John A. Davison
Just came across this comment:
“It seems to me that one can be a Christian and believe evolution (if “Christian” meanings nothing other than following the teachings of Jesus), but if one wants to be a supernaturalist Christian (as in taking at least some of the supernatural claims about god and angels and satan and jesus and miracles literally, as if they really exist), it would require some compartmentalization and suppression of cognitive dissonance. That an all-good, all-powerful, completely perfect and infallible God with intelligence, purposes and intentions would “create” through the incredibly sloppy process of natural selection is not something that can just be asserted by fiat. It needs to be demonstrated that such a claim is justified.
Also, evolution by natural selection explains the origins of our minds, our morals, even our religions (there is a burgeoning and exciting field of evolutionary study of religion emerging). Our sense of purpose, our feelings of love etc, our moral sense, our societies–these are evolved features of our species. Humans used to explain things such as the motion of the Sun teleologically–in terms of purposes, feelings, thoughts, social rules, etc. We later learned that when we do this it leads us astray. Why? Well, because the Sun is not a primate. It does not have these features any more than it has any other primate features. The Sun does not have purposes or goals or concerns for who follows social mores for the same reason it doesn’t have eyes or arms or a brain or a heart or any other feature of an evolved organism.
But, of course, the universe as a whole is not a primate either. Why should it have any features of human primates? Why should it have a ruler? Why should it have a mind, either in it or over it? Why should it have purpose or intention? I think the theory of evolution has shown us that what we call “love” and “purpose” and “good” are features of ourselves, applicable to ourselves. Applying them beyond our needs and our societies and our lives seems to me to be entirely discredited by science. It seems to me that we can’t speak of the “purpose” or the “ruler” of the universe for exactly the same reason we can’t speak of the “tri-color binocular vision” of the universe. It’s not a primate. It does not have these features. It has no ruler, no purposes, no intentions, no morals. These things are applicable to ourselves, but not to the universe as a whole.
But then, what’s left of God? God is usually described as an intelligence with purposes and goals and intentions. Sounds like a primate to me. And evolution has made it to where such claims cannot be made simply by fiat. Again, if someone wants to claim the universe has a “purpose” they would have to justify even being able to make such a claim at all.
Of course, one could still posit a wholly impersonal Spinozist or Deist god without running afoul of the problems I’m talking about. These would only be problems for a God that is said to be a mind with such things as intelligence and love and concern for humans. But sometimes I wonder whether a “god” that’s merely an impersonal, distant force without a mind or purposes or love or any such things can be properly called a “god” at all.”
Who do you think wrote it?
Sorry Alan but “evolution by natural selection” explains nothing. The rest of your message disintegrates into nothingness because of those four words. Natural selection never had anything to do with either the origin or substantial subsequent change of any organism. It is a myth necessary to a congenital mentality unable to see order and purpose in the universe. That is the mentality of P.Z. Myers, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins.
It is not necessary to characterize a God or Gods to establish beyond any question that such entities must have once existed. That is all that I have claimed and that cannot be denied by any objective student of the natural world. Those that presume that the origin and evolution of life occurred by chance are fools. All that MUST be required and CANNOT be denied is a past existence of one or more intelligences far beyond our power to comprehend. That is all that Robert Broom, Pierre Grasse, William Bateson and every other one of my sources ever demanded. That does not mean that a living, benevolent personal God does not exist. Gods are like that and nothing you or I or anyone else claims will ever alter that position. I am disappointed that you reject a purpose in your view of the universe, That perspective you share with P.Z. Myers, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, all of whom are my intellectual enemies. You have once again made your position indelibly clear. I am not in the least surprised.
An objective view of the present world indicates that there really was a purpose and a Plan which has now been fulfilled with the appearance of Homo sapiens. Unfortunately, that objective view also suggests that Homo sapiens will ensure his own destruction.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Alan, you are criticising religion because it once animated the sun, the earth, the space etc. From this you conclude that scientific mind sees the reality how it is. I don’t know if it has ever occured you that the neodarwinism is doing the same thing. Animals in ancient and medieval era represented moral qualities of mankind. With industrial revolution they lost these meaning and competition has been imposed upon them by the modern mind. Competition in society has been observed in the Nature too. Both cases are nothing else as sociomorph modelling transferred into the nature. No wonder there in pre-war Germany where competition didn’t play decisive role in society the scientitsts didn’t noticed that “natural selection” played any role in the evolution. Nowadays concept of “selfish gene” is the bizzare outcome of the neodarwinian teaching where the free market and competion is applied into genetic structures. In the next centuries all darwinism will be probably perceived as a curious theory of evolution of animals as those ancient fables about them.
Sorry, John and Martin,
I was apparently not clear in my previous post, in that I copied the comment from another commenter on another site. I did put it in quotes and ask who wrote it. Any ideas?
I think you would have to search very hard to find any comment from me regarding my personal religious beliefs, and harder to find anything from me on anyone else’s honest beliefs. I find the sermon, TV evangelising and the (largely) US propensity for witnessing pretty abhorrent. Belief is intimate and personal, certainly not for internet banter, and should be reserved for private meetings among consenting adults. Science, especially can be conducted without reference to religion as they are, as Gould said, non-overlapping magisteria. Which is why I regard claims linking Darwinism with atheism ludicrously irrelevant. I have asked this before, but why do you think it matters what a scientist’s personal beliefs are? What possible interest are anyone’s personal beliefs to anyone else? What business is it of anyone else’s what anyone’s personal beliefs are?
Martin (96)
Neodarwinian theory seems to me a very neat way of explaining how particular organisms ended up as and how they are. It fits the facts, such as fossil evidence and biochemical evidence, quite well. I really think you should read “The Extended Phenotype”, Dawkins’ advocacy of the gene as the unit of inheritance. It is decidedly not a religious (nor anti-religious) work. It might help to clarify misunderstandings you may have about evolutionary theory, which could make your criticism a little more incisive.
Not that you need my approval, but you are perfectly entitled to believe what you want about the future of Darwinism. If a better theory comes along you will be proved right.
Thank you Alan. I read the latest edition of the Selfish gene where some facts from the Extended phenotype has been worked out in a special chapter. You know I have no slightest intention to read all neodarwinian stuff from Dawkins. I suppose it is only wasting of time. It’s like to study the work of Engels or Plechanov. On the other hand I can recommend you some work from the botanist Wilhelm Troll about plants. He very consequently shows that all morphology of seed-plants are notning else as the variation of proportion of the ideal “Urpflanze”.
You know I have no slightest intention to read all neodarwinian stuff from Dawkins. I suppose it is only wasting of time.
But then it does open you to the charge of making “strawman” arguments, if you do not take time to comprehend what you are claiming as false. Has Troll been translated into English or French? If a seminal work is available, I will get, read and criticize it if you will do the same with “The Extended Phenotype”;
Alan Fox and Martin both.
This weblog is not for you two to squabble on. You are both participants at After The Bar Closes. It is there you should exchange your insults. I see nothing in your recent exchange that contributes anything of value to this thread. If you insist on continuing to snipe at each other here, I will delete the comments. One reason I have this weblog is because I have been baned from comment at Wesley Elsberry’s After The Bar Closes. I have no intention of allowing this weblog to become a flame pit like Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb and After The Bar Closes.
John
There was no squabble and certainly no insults. But you can run your own blog as you wish. I will refrain from further posts here.
I repeat here my prediction that by next February, Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb and RichardDawkins.net will have disappeared along with their sponsors from the ranks of meaningful discourse concerning the discussion of the mechanism of organic evolution. P.Z. Myers, Wesley Elsberry and Richard Dawkins will all have become embarrassing, insignificant little footnotes, the last surviving proponents of the most ill conceived, the most experimentally faiied, the most transparently naive hypothesis ever generated by a pathologically impaired human imagination.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Greetings Dr. Davison:
I used to comment under johndarius, Darius being my middle name.
I have said this before: You deserve a lot of credit, in laying your career as scientist on the line, speaking out against Darwinism as a non-scientific conjecture. Your thinking is more widely accepted than you realize.
Darwin’s “theory”, was never even a hypothesis, never subjected to the rigors of scientific inquiry. Darwin called it a “theory” right from the start. I can only assume (hope?) that Darwin was using the word colloquially. But as a scientist, Darwin was equivocating, and certainly misleading the public. I can only hope that was not his intention.
I have to sympathize with you about Myers and Dawkins. I think they are driven by more than anything else, ego, but also perhaps by the hypocrisy they have found in religion. Sad to say, there is not much we can do about the later. However, Ghandi reportedly said, ‘the whole world’s problems would be solved if people followed the principles found in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount’. Myer’s carping against religion falls on deaf ears to anyone who has carefully read Jesus’ words. Fortunately, this message is found in the most widely circulated book on earth. And people of right heart will see any claims by Dawkins and Myers, or anyone else of like reasoning, as just plain false. If people would just read that message daily, and put in to PRACTICE that message, just imagine what the world would be like!
One way to counter Dawkins and the others is by exposing Darwin’s theory as being unscientific, which you have been doing. There are other explanations that better support the facts and the data, both from geology, paleontology, and biology.
Thanks for your efforts,
John
John Townsend
It is I who thanks you. This weblog has been little more than a monologue consisting of my personal views. I hope you and others will consider my essay in progress in message # 63 on the PREDICTIONS thread. In it I offer my explanation for personalities like P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins, neither of whom have offered anything of substance serving to further our understanding of the great mystery of organic evolution. I know this doesn’t sound right, but I honestly believe they cannot help themselves as they were “born that way.” Accordingly they are more to be pitied than despised, a distinction difficult to implement.
Like Ghandi, Einstein also was a great admirer of Christ’s message. Even if Christ’s life, death and resurrection should someday prove to be without foundation, He will remain as the greatest model for human behavior in the history of Western Civilization.
Thank you again for the kind words.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://cedros.globat.com/~thebrites.org/News/BrightsDance.html
Don’t miss this precious gem and the “Wistar Polka” also available there.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.youngcosmos.com/blog/archives/240#comment-838
I also managed to transmit this message to Myers on his Pharyngula forum. Of course it won’t last.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/more_money_than_sense.php#comments
Well it is still there, #221, five hours later. Apparently someone isn’t minding Myers’ security these days.
Still there 11:AM EST April 14
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
I opened a thread “Selfish gene – neodarwinian mysticism” at EvC and richarddawkins.net. At EvC the thread has been closed and neodarwinian admins there called me “dumb”, “foolish” and “idiot”. See message 17 and my response.
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=3590&m=16
Martin
That is great news. Once again they have exposed themselves as the intellectual trash they are. At EvC they are so cowardly that even the administrators must use aliases. I repeat my prediction that all these intellectual bastions of Darwinian mysticism will be nothing but embarrassing footnotes by next February. I am looking forward to it with great anticipation. I think it is amazing that you are willing to put up with their shallow tactics.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
“Science commits suicide when she adopts a creed.”
Thomas Henry Huxley
Darwinism is the slowest yet most certain form of suicide ever attempted by the human animal.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Thank you for your support John. In the end I decided not to tolerate their depicable behaviour and I called them
what they are. I have mentioned also their depicable behaviour towards you as well. I will see how long the message “survives” there.
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=673&m=226
It had taken only 13 minutes before I was banned at EvC.
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=673&m=226
My banisment at AtBC is now a matter of this day I would say.
I left there also an old message to LouFCD from you John.
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=48018d830fefa278&act=ST&f=14&t=5188&st=480
Any forum which must banish its critics has defined itself as nothing more than an ideological disaster destined to certain ultimate oblivion. It is hopeless trying to reason with any such collection of like minded, “prescribed,” “born that way,” “dyed-in-the-wool” intellectual sheep. They form spontaneous “groupthinktanks,” rallying around self appointed leaders whose primary goal is to incite and sustain mob behavior for as long as possible. Adolf Hitler, Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers are prominent examples.
We are all victims in a predestined universe. Some of us are luckier than others. My good friend Martin is one of the lucky ones.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Thank you John. May I send your latest post or ideas to AtBC?
Of course you may. Please do!
I hope the thing is over. My thread has been closed and my posts do not appear at other threads either. Probably the retarted admin LouFCD doesn’t know how to ban me at good. So I can login but my posts are not published anymore.
My quotations of professor John Davison’s ideas has been moved to “Bathroom wall”.
24 hours and I have been banned from two forums I participated almost 2 years at. The trigger was my criticism of bizzare theory of “selfish gene”. Do you know that “selefish gene” is not “selfish” and it is only a metaphor how to better underestand unselfishness of genes? Dialectic Engels couldn’t have put it better.
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=48020d6840141c6d;act=ST;f=14;t=1272;st=5880
and the page following.
Above is the link to the Bathroom Wall where Martin managed to get his licks in and mine as well. Thank you Martin. I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if those remarks might soon be deleted. Wesley Elsberry doesn’t like having my name mentioned. I can’t say as I blame him.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
“The applause of a single human being is of great consequence.”
Samuel Johnson
The message I managed to post at Pharyngula, #221 to which I referred in message 108, was finally removed, without explanation, sometime today. It must be terrible for Myers to have to constantly police his many threads to see if “my security has been penetrated again.” He continues to remind one of Captain Queeg in the Caine Mutiny. Maybe I should snail mail him a couple of ball bearings as a pacifier. He is going to need them!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
i love it so!
“How sweet it is.”
Jackie Gleason
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/repeat-after-me-this-has-nothing-to-do-with-my-views-on-religion/#comments
This thread is a fascinating look at Richard Dawkins, who seems all of a sudden to be uncertain about determinism. How can a chance worshipping atheist like Dawkins possibly take such a position?
“EVERYTHING is determined… by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein, my emphasis
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=84#001247
my message posted 5:40 AM today
Once again DaveScot/David Springer exposes his real character and utter lack of objectivity with -
“I love being right.”
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“Mankind fiddled while earth burned.”
I notice that Pharyngula Z. Myers has suddenly shut up about the Holy Father while “bennie” is visiting Wahington D.C. Maybe my complaint to the University of Minnesota Board of Regents was not entirely without effect. I once again recommend that others join with me in exposing this hate mongering, “godless liberal” radical to his superiors. He hasn’t even called Bush “asshole-in-chief” lately.
Unfortunately for Myers -
“What happens in cyberdumb stays in cyberdumb.”
John A. Davison
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“There are more horses’ asses than horses.”
anonymous
I have been informed by the Chancellor of the Morris campus where Myers teaches that Myers has every legal right to say whatever he pleases so long as it is clear that he doesn’t represent the University of Minnesota. Are we to believe then that Myers does not represent the University of Minnesota, that his students do not peruse his weblog, are not poisoned by his rabid vitriol against all that is good and virtuous?
My letter of complaint was addressed not to the University of Minnesota Administration but to the Board of Regents which oversees that Administration. Apparently there is no need for a Board of Regents at the University of Minnesota. I have yet to hear from them and probably will not.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Here is the text of my response to Chancellor Johnson
Dear Chancellor Jacqueline Johnson
I am disappointed but not surprised to receive your reply. I recommend that
you review his weblog before you blindly approve of its content and intent
on merely legal grounds.
Furthermore, my complaint was for consumption by the Board of Regents, not
the Chancellor’s office of the University of Minnesota at Morris. Tom
Sullivan’s silence already established that the University Administration
had no interest in the matter. I do not understand why you are even
responding to me. My complaint was not for you to hear and certainly not for
you to respond to.
It is the role of the Board of Regents to oversee the policies of the
University and to intervene when they find those policies in conflict with
what they regard to be the goals of the institution and the citizens they
represent. That I still hope they may do. Professor Myers is far more
dangerous than Ward Churchill as he attacks the very institutions that allow
him that opportunity. Myers represents the University of Minnesota exactly
as the University of Minnesota permits Myers to represent it.
Sincerely yours,
John A. Davison, Professor Emeritus of Biology, University of Vermont.
Mailing address: L4 Grandview Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403
Telephone (802) 863-2995
email nosivadaj@msn.com
john.a.davison.free.fr/
—– Original Message —–; “Sharon Reich Paulsen”
From: “Jacquie Johnson”
To:
Cc: “Tom Sullivan”
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:41 AM
Subject: University of Minnesota, Morris
> Dear Dr. Davison,
>
> Thank you for contacting the University with your concern about the
> Internet behavior of University of Minnesota, Morris Associate Professor
> Paul Myers on his web log Pharyngula.
>
> According to University of Minnesota policies, University faculty and
> staff have a legal right to voice their opinions on issues of public
> interest as long as they make it clear that they are not speaking on
> behalf of the University of Minnesota. Professor Myers’ personal
> “blog,” is neither reviewed nor approved by the institution.
>
> Thank you very much for taking time to express your concerns.
>
> –
> Jacqueline Johnson
> Chancellor
> University of Minnesota Morris
> 600 E 4th Street
> Morris, MN. 56267
> 320-589-6020
> jrjohnso@morris.umn.edu
>
>
I am afraid the response from Chancellor Jacqueline Johnson is unsatisfactory. Doctor Myers publishes his articles like an overheated neodarwinian automaton every two hours. He must probably use Uni inet network during his working hours (perhaps he reports this wasting of time to some “research”?). It is not only that he writes his articles every two hours – he must study another articles in newspapers to which he responds. If he were an employee in a private sector and runs his “random ejaculation” blog there he would be fired immidiately.
Thanks Martin
I copied message 124 and sent it to the Board of Regents. Why have a Board of Regents if it is just a tool of the University Administration? Maybe this time I will receive a reply from the Chairperson of the Board of Regents. I can’t believe that every member of that board approves of P.Z. Myers’ behavior or of the posture of the University of Minnesota administration. Of course I could be wrong. Time will tell.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=84#001254
and my currrent comment on anonymity.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php
This is to remind all where I stand in P.Z. Myers’ “kill file.”
It doesn’t get any better than this!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Don’t miss this one folks.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/atheism_is_a_condom_for_your_m.php#comments
According to P.Z. Myers atheism is a condom for ones mind, protection from the evils of contagious Christianity or any other departure from the aimless, purposeless universe in which this poor “prescribed,” helpless, feckless, moral and ethical disaster exists.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”
Winston Churchill
That’s P.Z. Myers!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=84#001259
comment on May 1, 4:40
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=84#001260
comment May 1, 10:19
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=84#001261
comment May 2, 15:33
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-85.html
comment May 9, 20:05
Check this one out folks. It is hard to believe isn’t it?
As everyone knows by now, I have been banished from commentary on the following weblogs -
ARN, RichardDawkins,net, Uncommon Descent, Pharyngula, EvC, Panda’s Thumb, After the Bar Closes and many others. However, there is an interesting feature that distinguishes P.Z, Myers’ Pharyngula from all the other forums and weblogs. Myers allows others, registered or not, bannished or not, to submit comments which he receives and holds for approval. We all know what that means don’t we? Mine never appear, but I have the satisfaction of knowing he has read them!
I mention this because it allows others, as it has allowed me, to inform Myers via his “one way communication system” what they think about him and his forum. I believe he is the only “blogczar” who allows this form of communication. I hope others will also use this opportuniy to let Myers know how they feel about his atheist, purposeless, Darwinian perspective on the great mystery of organic evolution. Let me know how you fare.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=85#001272
comment May 12, 23:57
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=85#001273
comment May 13, 5:15
“I love being right.”
David Springer
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=85#001274
My comment just delivered..
Witness Myers gloating over the damages awarded to a victim of abuse by a single Catholic priest 35 years ago as Myers abuses thousands with his “hatespeech” which he delivers daily as Associate Professor of Biology at the University of Minnesota at Morris.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=85#001276
My comment May 16, 2008
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-86.html
My comment, May 24, 4:15
Check this out to see how I was treated after introducing my published essay. It is all very revealing isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-86.html
comment May 26, 3:39
For the record.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=86#001282
just posted. As one can see, I am not the only one laying it on P.Z. Myers. However, I take pleasure in knowing that I am the only one he has to delete. He is obviously terrified of me and my sources.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=86#001288
my comment, May 28, 5:21
I love it so!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/plonk.php
I like to periodically call attention to the way P.Z. Myers has treated Martin and me with his revealing, obviously genetic, congenital loathing. What a loser he really is!
I love it so!
Referring back to my message #82, I now report that I still have heard nothing from the Board of Regents of The University of Minnesota. Apparently they, like the Administration they oversee, approve without reservation of P.Z, Myers and his incendiary denigration of all that is virtuous in contemporary society. It is a sad commentary on the posture of a once respectable University. A faculty member like P.Z. Myers could never have survived a half century ago when I recieved my Doctorate from that institution.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I would like to know who finances the neodarwinian den called EvC forum. This forum presents itself as an independent venue where opinions about evolution can be changed freely. Nothing is more away from the truth.
The contributers there are bunch of fanatic neodarwinists who don’t like discussing any problem they have no prepared answer to at “the talkorigin”. What’s more – all of them are administrators there at the same time! There is no one administartor who is a creationist. Would you believe it happened for “independent” forum?
These neodarwinian fanatics support each other like twins. The head of them is admin Percy whom you have to beg to open a new thread – unless you are a darwinist or stupid student-creationist to laugh at of course. My latest – and last – thread about mysticism of selfish gene was opened and closed and the director Percy called me names (idiot etc).
Poor neodarwinian fanatics are probably pretty nervous there. Professor Dawkins’ “selfish gene” seems to be out of breath nowadays. The whole great building based upon “kin selection” and “inclussive fitness” is starting to fall apart. No lesser neodarwinian scientist than Wilson criticised “kin slection” repeatedly (also in 2006 his “Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology”):
[b]
Four decades of research has revealed the inadequacy of genetic relatedness as the primary explanation of eusociality. The haplodiploid hypothesis has failed. In addition to termites, numerous other diploid eusocial clades have been discovered since the 1960s (40).
The colonial insects thus seemingly command us to turn back to the external environment and group selection and ○ away from a preoccupation with abstract models of kin selection if we are to best understand the origin and maintenance of eusociality.
[/b]
Nothing is left from great concept of “kin selection” or “selfish gene” after 40 years. And it was professor Dawkins who called explanation of eusociality “the most spectacular triumphs of the selfish gene theory”!
Professor John Davison’s clairvoyance regarding the falacy of neodarwinian’s theorizing is now more clearer than ever. Prescribed evolution should be accepted. The sooner the better.
Jay Gould had been perplexed by the fact that evolution of insect preceded evolution of Angiospermae (flowering plants). Now professor Dawkins/Hamilton concept is cracking. No one know where “natural selection” is taking place anymore. Natural selection is empty concept, mantra.
No wonder neodarwinian fanatics in EvC or AtBC have to have their bastion free of any criticism.
This is the message I wrote today at richard.dawkins.net. In cas I am banned or the message is deleted I copy it here:
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=40293&p=961937#p961937
Yeah, that’s me. Doctor Myers banned me under pretext I was sockpupet of professor John Davison. It was a pure lie (as everyone could have checked my IP address) and after doctor Myers called me John’s sycophant and contibutors there started denigrated John and me I felt no oblige to observe my ban.
I’ve been banned also from EvC forum and AtBC forum. On those forum I tried to discuss problem of mimicry (the weakest point of neodarwinism – as the eusociality is the weakest point of “kin slection” no matter what neodarwinian school claims). EvC – “unbiased forum evol. vs creation” – is run by fanatic neodarwinists (there is no one creationist as admin) and almost all neodarwinian contributors there are also admins! I’ ve addressed the whole issue about EvC forum at John Davison’s blog today:
http://john.a.davison.free.fr/?p=18#comments
I wanted to discuss at Pharyngula some interesting ideas about evolution as written by great zoologist Adolf Portmann or entomologist Franz Heikertinger who were no way darwinists. Their non-darwinian ideas about coloration of animals are worth of discussing in my opinion. But the atmosphere of denigration there was unbelievable. The same for AtBC – but the intellectual level of contributors at AtBC are mainly under level zero – only denigration, as SteviePinhead proved in this thread sufficiently I hope.
I underestand that professor John Davison is persona non grata in almost all forums. Neverthenless I consider his “Evolutionary Manifesto” or “prescribed evolution” for the greatest work elucidating the mystery of evolution.
Thank you very much Martin for your continuing support and your willingness to attack and expose the Darwinian myth and all those that support it. Atheist Darwinism is in its death throes and I repeat my prediction that by next February P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins will be little more than embarrassing footnotes in the history of evolutionary science. Neither of them has ever contributed a scintilla to the paradigm they so frantically defend. They have both now completely abandoned science to dedicate all their energies to the only thing they are congenitally capable of understanding – a cynical, godless, empty world, devoid of purpose, a world which has been produced by accident. As I tried to explain in my essay -
http://www.investigatingatheism.info/johnadavison.html
it is impossible to hate those who are congenitally incapable of recognizing a purposeful universe. We should simply shun them and treat them as the intellectual lepers they have proven themselves to be.
Thank you again Martin for your unflagging support and our shared rejection of the most failed hypothesis in the history of descriptive and experimental science.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
For the record -
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=86#001293
So much for John Wilkins and his “Evolution Thoughts” weblog.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Good job John. I added there my comment as well. Unfortunatelly my comment has been intercepted and I don’t know if it ever appears. I copy it here just for a record:
I would say more and more voices would support professor John Davison opinion that evolution is over and sex – once established – prohibit any further evolution. No lesser scientist than Wilson published in 2006 his “Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology” where he entirely dismissed kin selection as plausible explanation of eusociality. He mentioned meiosis (I suppose in sexualy reprodcing animals) as stabilizing factor. Professor Davison’s concept regarding meiosis refers to saltationism. What a coincidence!
There is no need to emphasize the role of natural selection in evolutionary processes. It plays only conservative role. Btw. no one neodarwinist know on which level natural selection operates. Some say it is genes, some say (like Wilson) it is groups. “Natural selection” thus seem to be some mystic power no one can really apprehend.
Martin
Your message did appear at Wilkins blog. I tried once again to respond there and my message this time was not summarily blocked but is being considered. It damn well better appear or I will expose Wilkins just as I have exposed every other blogczar who must muzzle one with whom he disagrees. I am getting sick and tired of all these intolerant, arrogant, protectionist ideologues, not one of whom has ever published a word themselves on the Darwinian paradigm they so blindly defend.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
As for natural selection -
“The struggle for existence and natural selection are not progressive agencies, but being, on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard.”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 406
How can natural selection have played a role in a structure which had not yet appeared? This is the question Mivart asked in Darwin’s own day and it has yet to be answered because it cannot be answered.
Natural selection never had anything to do with evolution any more than artificial selection does now. All that either can achieve is the generation of intraspecific varieties and in some instances subspecies none of which are incipient species anyhow. Like gradualism, natural selection is just one more aspect of the Darwinian fairy tale. So are population genetics and genetic drift. All creative evolution was planned in advance and is now finished.
Just as ontogeny terminates with the adult which can only die, so phylogeny has finally terminated with the present biota which can only become extinct.
I repeat my conviction -
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=86#001293
I am once again allowed at Wilkins’ blog. It is all very revealing so I recommend all follow the exchange.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=86#001293
I am keeping this link up to date by editing. It is an interesting experiment in human behavior.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=87#001294
My comment June 5, 2:48
I am afraid that John Wilkins is just one more garden variety atheist Darwinian who must dismiss an adversary by calling him “an idiot.”
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2008/06/dembski_on_the_consequences_of.php
I managed to get in a few licks here.
Enjoy
Martin
The first to recognize the failure of natural selection was Mivart In Darwin’s own day. He was followed by Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1909, William Bateson in 1914, Reginald C, Punnett in 1915 and, most important of all, Leo Berg in 1922 who identified the real role for natural selection -
“The struggle for existence and natural selection are not progressive agencies, but being, on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard.”
Nomogenesis, page 406.
In other words, natural selection is anti-evolutionary. So are sexual reproduction, allelic mutations, the vast majority of which are deleterious, and genetic drift. None of these have ever played a role in creative evolution. Until these realities are accepted, the mindess debate will continue, dominated by the two major factions, neither of which have a leg to stand on. There is no evidence for supernatural intervention and there is no significant role for chance. The book of evolution was written millions of years ago by an author or authors far beyond our power to understand or even imagine. The very word evolution is derived from the Latin evolvo, meaning to unfold, like the pages of a book. Both Leo Berg and William Bateson before him recognized what I believe is the correct interpretation of the great mystery of phylogeny -
“Finally, Bateson likewise (1914, p. 640) inclines to the view that the entire process of evolution may be regarded as an ‘unpacking of an original complex which contained within itself the whole range of diversity which living things present.’”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 359.
and speaking for himself -
“Evolution is in a great measure an unfolding of pre-existing rudiments.”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 406.
Thanks for your support and valuable contributions..
I sent this comment to Wilkins’ blog (who presents himself as an ape on his photo now). I am afraid it will not be published. I also post a response to Rosenhouse blog where the blogger is criticising Dembski (see previous link by John Davison). It has been shown immediately – that’s a surprise – but Wilkins has to “approve” my post. Here it is :
I consider professor John Davison’s work on evolution “Evolutionary Manifesto” as the most inspiring anti-darwinian work available nowadays. I don’t see a reason why you are behaving as idiots. Are you so angry that somebody criticises your neodarwinian concept as pure fallacy? No wonder. Sometimes even Universities are full of fanatics unable to comprehend the light of wisdom. Giordano Bruno had his own experience in Oxford with pundits:
…and if you do not believe this, go to Oxford and let them tell you the things that happened to the Nolan…
.
.
.
Let them tell you with what rudeness and discourtesy that pig [doctor] did proceed and with what patience and humanness did that other, who in fact showed himself to be a native of Naples.
Giordano Bruno: LA CENA DE LE CENERI
There is a discussion on richarddawkins.net about orthoptera mimicking angiosperms leaves. Franz Heikertinger dismissed the whole concept. He presented in his book species Cyrtophyllites rogeri living long before any flowering plants exist. The whole phenomenon is in accord with prescribed evolution. How can an animal mimic something that does not exist? (Neo)darwinists used Wilhelm Troll’s name to refute my objections. I answered:
“I am glad to read that professor Wilhelm Troll’s work is still up to date. I’ve read some parts of his “Praktische Einführung in die Pflanzenmorphologie.” His main works have never been translated into English (the same for Franz Heikertinger’s “Das Rätsel der Mimikry und seine Lösung. Eine kritische Darstellung des Werdens, des Wesens und der Widerlegung der Tiertrachthypothesen. Jena, 1954.” I’ve mentioned above). Professor Troll as prominent botanist dismissed darwinism as explanation of plants morphology. He quoted several times Goethe’s “Metamorphosis of plants” as the main source of his thinking. (btw. zoologist professor anti-adaptionist Adolf Portmann, Uni Basel considered Goethe’s ideas very inspiring as well.) Professor Wilhelm Troll on evolution:
professor Wilhelm Troll wrote:
The peculiarity of living beings is determined by ‘‘thoughts and ideas of a creative power which penetrates from the ideal world [Welthintergrunde] into nature, which gives new characteristics to matter and creates the type-like basic organic forms’’7 (Troll, 1937, VI).
One should ask: why such a prominent botanist (and probably one of the most influental scientist of “German idealistic morphology” ) dismissed darwinism?”
Martin
Thanks for the voice of reason in a sea of idiocy, bigotry and congenital ignorance. It is much appreciated. I have predicted that Darwinism, in all its atheist trappings, will be nothing more than an embarrassing footnote by next February. Trust me all you mystics out there or, better yet, don’t as it is more gratifying that way when ones predictions come true.
I love it so!
You are wellcome John. Your Manifesto is the work that influenced me more than any popular “creationist” theorizing available nowadays. You are on the right track and I am trying to to support your name and views wherever I can. You are not alone. The scientists you haven’t mentioned in your work – entomologist Franz Heikertinger,
professor Zdenek Neubauer, professor Adolf Portmann as evolutionists came to the same conclusion – the “natural selection” doesn’t play any role in evolution.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=87#001296
As you can see I have been banished from one more bastion of atheist Darwinian mysticism, this one run by a mathematician with a very limited knowledge of the evolutionary literature.
and here as well for the same reasons.
http://scienceblogs.com/cgi-bin/MT/mt-comments.cgi
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=87#001300
and as you can see from my last couple of current comments, elsewhere as well. Note also my challenge to P.Z. Myers delivered through his one way communication system.
I offer this link which I just posted at “brainstorms.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=89#001338
I am encouraged that others are finally exposing Myers as the degenerate insurrectionist he so obviously is.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable,”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=89#001338
I see that Dembski at Uncommon Descent has also called attention to Myers’ hideous posture. It is long past time for Myers to be recognized as the ethical and moral degenarate he has always been.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=90#001352
My latest message 4:28, July 18, 08.
especially to the exchange between David “I love being right” Springer and myself which has become, as usual, a monologue as Springer once again abandons the field to gloat over an imagined victory.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/
Note that Paul Zachary Myers hasn’t presented a new thread since August 10. All the several recent threads are the work of PZminion, whoever that is.
I now am unable to view After The Bar Closes, just as I have been denied viewing the proceedings of ARN and richarddawkins.net. I am flattered to merit such special attention. I suspect Alan Fox may be responsible.
I love it so!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
—————————————————————————————————
John, when I find the time I will help you get around this little issue. Those sites have your public internet protocol address cached so whenever you try to reach they’re servers your packets are dropped based on access list/filtering software. You’ll be able to view those blogs and post as well, if your considering anonymity for the price of participation. Surely they will ban and block you once more they find a new user registered under that name.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
“Anonymous benefactor”
Thank you but I prefer to let their shabby tactics define their insecurity. I am aware of the means you suggest but I feel the same way that I do about those that must ban me from contributing on their “groupthink” forums Those tactics also define their character or, more precisely, the lack of same.
I hope that if anything is posted at After The Bar Closes involving me or this weblog, that some kind soul will link to it from this thread so that all can appreciate the depths to which my many adversaries continue to descend.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“Even a paranoid can have enemies.”
Henry Kissinger
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
You are not blocked from viewing at AtBC, John. Wesley altered the software a while ago specifically to enable you (and any other banned user) to view the site.
I am happy to let every troublemaker present his views as long as he understands that if he is offering words that do not contribute to the purposes of this blog that he will be deleted from the user list. As usual Alan Fox has offered absolutely nothing of value to the purposes of this blog. He never has here or anywhere. One more gratuitous comment from Fox and I will delete him from the user list. That was the fate of Rob, Woot and a few others and it will be the fate of Alan Fox if he continues to ignore my warnings.
Got that Alan? Write that down. I suggest you take your useless, commentary elsewhere. This is my last warning. You have cluttered up this blog long enough. Be sure to check the sideboard on your way out, especially Darwinian Sorcery where I have added the works of your idol, the charlatan Richard Dawkins.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Martin.
This computer is already blocked from viewing ARN and richarddawkins.net. There is more than one way to “skin the Davison cat.”
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
When I attempt to read After The Bar Closes the following appears -
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=14
That is the main page at AtBC. You are not blocked from viewing there. Got that! Write that down!
Not from this computer it isn’t. I AM blocked and you are out of here. Farewell.
I have removed both of Alan Fox’s user identities. Knowing him, he will probably resurface under a new guise.
I prefer to let congenital trash like you continue to expose yourself by whatever means you find useful.
Enjoy yourself. It’s later than you think.
In the meantime I think I will clean up some of the garbage you have already left here.
Your problem is that being on WordPress’s own server is a bit like Google blogger. You can delete and moderate comments, but you can’t erase other WordPress accounts; that would be bad for their business. You need to move to your own sever if you wish to exert total control.
————————————————————————————————–
That may soon happen. But for the time being, your comments will be regarded as spam.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Don’t stop now lowlife. Keep it up and I will clean up after you as best I can.
I love it so!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Sleep tight trashbag!. If you are smart you won’t come back in the morning. Go back to your cronies at After the Bar Closes, also known as Esley Welsberry’s Alamo, with richarddawkins.net and Pharyngula the major surviving Meccas of the biggest hoax in the history of science. Give the whole rotten lot of them my personal, freshly steaming, feculent regards.
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
“Anonymous benefactor”
I don’t know if they cached John’s public internet protocol address. In that case they would block all
customers of internet provider where John is connected as well. For instance I am connected to web through chello.slovakia. They would block let say 100.000 customers of chello.slovakia. I think IProvider make communication instead of me and they know nothing about me if I block cookies.
.
I would say John should delete his cookies.
—————————————————————————————————
Hi Martin,
Each customer is assigned a public IP address which is visible to the outside world (usually assigned to the modem which is on the customer premise equipment, not the ISP. The ISP dynamically assigns an IP address using DHCP and mapping that IP to the Ethernet MAC hardware address the same way your network interface card on your PC is getting its IP address if you have a router or a DHCP server). If your behind a router, some form of network address translation/port address translation is used to map your public external IP to private internal IP addresses and vice versa when sending and receiving outside of your own network to the rest of the world, this acts as a type of firewall as well.
This is not equivalent to banning all users from that ISP, the ISP simply supplies different types of connection to the internet for individual homes or business and assigns that connection a subsequent IP which it routes to the rest of the world. Once it gets to the ISP, from there, routers which do all the dirty work get those packets across the internet to the intended destination. ISP’s themselves typically give out class A addresses given that they must supply a large subset of users, this is done by subnetting the class A IP. If ATBC or whoever else were to actually ban all those users from that pool of IP addresses which the ISP assigned, they cannot ban that whole subset by banning one specific IP, they would have to ban a whole network part of the IP address which includes the subnetted part minus the host part.
If however, an organization sits behind a router and has hundreds or thousands of computers feeding off a fiber optic channel, then all those subsequent computers will be block from a site even if one of those computers is blocked or banned from a site given that its blocked based on the public IP.
HTTP Cookies I presume wouldn’t do much because cookies are used to keep track of the users session (each user is assigned an ID when they login), cookies also track customer preferences (by sending cookie to the web server back to the web browser and returning to the web server creating a stateful state (unlike a stateless one where no end to end connection orientation is made between two nodes) where previous visited web pages on that web server are kept track of) and authenticate users while they are not logged in. If I’m not mistaken, you have to be logged in at least once before cookies become active. Only then does the user inject his/her credentials and that gives the server the information it needs to keep track of the user even if they log out.
One way is to use an external proxy server to hide John’s public IP address, proxies are also used in cases where owners of a internet resource forced limitations on accessing they’re servers from certain geographical locations, they are also used for caching in already visited websites for quicker access time. The other way for John to do it is to simply contact his ISP, tell the ISP that his network is under attack and that he demands to change his public IP address. Since John doesn’t have a business account he doesn’t have a static IP address assigned, but a dynamic IP which has a certain lease time, IP always has a lease time or expiration time.
I’m not sure about whether cookies has anything to do with it (maybe you are correct VMartin), since John is probably using Internet Explorer then he’d go to tools -> internet options -> delete cookies. Then his next step would be to contact his ISP and obtain a new IP address which should allow him to view any website from that point on.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
You have obviously found the delete button
————————————————————————–
“Instead, why don’t you explain what *your* theory is, Alan?
Or, explain why it’s ‘adolescent’ to ask you to explain yourself.
Alan, for your country’s sake, I sincerely hope you’re not a typical result of the French educational system.”
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
No worries, John. I’m off to drink beer even though the bar has closed.
—————————————————————————-
“Alan, we’re waiting.
What’s your explanation?
Have one?
Anything? Nothing?”
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Alan Fox
Are you still with us? Don’t be shy. Remind us of your existence as you are very important to the evolutionary community of scholars. Otherwise -
Contort yourself and insert your individuality!
I love it so!
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=14
This is what I still get when I click on After The Bar Closes. Apparently Herr Doktor Professor Esley Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry) has joined richarddawkins.net and the folks at ARN in denying this computer access to his “inner sanctum” where the effete elite meet to greet one another to the beat of Der Fuhrer’s feet and play the mindless daily game of “Can you top this?”
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
You sem to have completely abandoned any last vestige of integrity, John. Well, so be it. You are not worth any further comment.
Alan
Stop proving to the whole world that you have absoutely nothing of value to present on this weblog or anywhere else for that matter.
I suggest you go back to After The Bar Closes and tell your Fuhrer, Herr Doktor Professor Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry) to allow me to observe his inner sanctum. Please stop lying about my not being blocked. Lying makes me irritable and you know what that means.
I have no idea who my “anonymous benefector’ is myself. That is why he/she/them is/are the “anonymous benefactor(s).” Get it? Probably not.
If I am not worth any further comment, why do you insist on presenting further comments? Do you realize how foolish you must seem to a casual observer?
Do you have a hangover from last night’s beer drinking binge? Are you drinking again or is it still? Do you have a drinking problem? I’ll bet you do which is why you will never amount to a hill of beans.
“Stifle yourself dingbat.”
Archie Bunker
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
———————————————————————————————-
Just to add to John’s comment, you are obviously lying your ass off about Weasleberry tinkering with the software to allow John public viewing. Tell me Alan, (and God or mud forbid that you are not as logically deficient as the rest of your Darwinian witches) if John is able to access google, his own blog, iscid, young cosmos and the rest of the links he included on the sidebar, would that not indicate that his internet communication is indeed functioning properly and that Weasleberry has in fact tinkered with the software to deny John public viewing?
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Cordova, perhaps? The phrasing is childish enough and I can’t imagine Springer using the phrase “Darwinian witches”.
Alan
I have never edited anyones comments except my own.
You are beginning to sound like Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny. And what makes you think Springer would even dream of being my “anonymous benefactor?” Both Springer and Sal Cordova have your number, so it is only natural you might suspect them. You are oviously suffering from degenerative paranoia – probably alcohol induced.
Paul Zachary Myers, another cowardly blowhard, is also showing signs of clinical paranoia by describing his aversaries as having “penetrated my security.” And how about his daily logo – “random biological ejaculations.” What a mess! It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Now, like a good little Darwimp, you go back to the “Sticky Floors Saloon” and tell Der Fuhrer Herr Doktor Professor Esley Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry) that if he doesn’t lift that ban I will make his life even more miserable than I already have. Remind him to read my essay “The Age of Denial” where I have exposed him and other polarized ideologues who have excluded me from their protectionist intellectual ghettos. You tell that one time fisheries biologist that I’m just getting warmed up! Got that? Write that down!
“You ain’t heard nothin’ yet.”
Al Jolson
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable”
Fortunately, my SCION Tc is soon due for service, so I will use the Toyota waiting room computer to play catch-up ball with the trash at After The Bar Closes, ARN and richarddawkins.net. In the meantime, I would appreciate any information emanating from those protectionist, isolationist ghettos relating to this blog, the primary purpose for which is to expose and eliminate hide bound ideology from the annals of evolutionary science – no small task!
Some time ago I predicted that by next February Paul Zachary Myers and Richard Dawkins will have become nothing but pathetic footnotes in the history of evolutionary science. Der Fuhrer Herr Doktor Professor Esley Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry) never mattered anyway except as a surrogate of P.Z. Myers and one more magnet for degenerate, impotent blowhards like oldmanintheskydidn’tdoit, Arden Chatfield (an alias), Alan Fox and most of the balance of the denizens of the Sticky Floors Saloon. Of course Myers is nothing but the New World version of Richard Dawkins. The chronological chain of command is pretty obvious. Mayr – Gould – Dawkins – Myers – etc, congenital atheist (Darwinian) mystics all, like nearly all pure white cats, stone deaf to Einstein’s “Music of the spheres.”
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
This is for the record.
Der Fuhrer Herr Doktor Professor Esley Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry) is by now fully aware that everyone knows he has blocked me from viewing his inner sanctum. Now I am a generous person so I am giving him one last chance to reverse that block. I expect to be able to view After The Bar Closes within 24 hours. If that can’t be arranged I will do everything in my power to destroy Der Fuhrer Herr Doktor Professor Esley Welsberry (pronounced Velsberry), his Panda’s Thumb, his After The Bar Closes and his reputation as well the reputation of the cofounder of Panda’s Thumb – Paul Zachary Myers. If he chooses to ignore my request then I recommend that he suggest that Paul Zachary Myers to do the same thing he did and deny me the opportunity to observe Pharyngula. That way I will be in the best if all possible worlds by having the three major bastions of Darwinian atheist mysticism consolidated as my mortal enemies.
“War, God help me, I love it so!
General George S. Patton
“The best defense is to be as offensive as possible.”
John A. Davison
It doesn’tr get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A. Davison
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/to_the_clever_dicks_who_think.php#comments
This is one of the most revealing of PeeZee’s countless threads. It is all about him. He is more perfectly self-absorbed than even David “I love being right” Springer.
Just as PeeZee doesn’t care what “bennie” (The Holy Father) thinks, many of us don’t really care what Paul Zachary Myers thinks.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/evolve_sex.php
Quick before Pee Zee deletes it. See my comment #58. It won’t last long.
I love it so!
It is still there after two hours! It was finally deleted sometime after two hours. I am sure some of his foul mouthed clientele had a chance to read what I thought about the Darwinian fantasy. Basically what I claimed was that sexual reproduction, Mendelian Genetics and natural selection were all antievolutionary devices which they most certainly were! I hope it gave them all heartburn or worse, maybe the runs!
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=33398610&postID=115662883399780616
This link is one of my most successful demonstrations of the kind of intellectual garbage that has come to characterize internet communication. I call your special attention to janiebelle and Kristine. Aren’t they wonderful examples of the fairer sex?
I love it so!
It is no wonder why I now require registration before one comments on this forum.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Alan Fox
I am sorry that I had to delete you but I have no intention of tolerating anyone who claimed that I was not blocked at After The Bar Closes after I had presented absolute proof that I was.
You are homozygous at the garbage locus. Got that? Write that down.
Alan Fox
There is no way you can double check whether or not Esley Welsberry has blocked this computer. When I click on After The Bar Closes I get comments presented in 2005. Why don’t you ask Welsberry whether or not he has blocked me? I hope he denies it. I expect an apology which I will let stand when you scrape up the courage to present it.
I am going to leave your paranoid fantasies until 8:00 PM EST so everyone can appreciate just how sick and malicious you really are. I also do not appreciate the aspersions you are casting on Sal Cordova who is a Christian gentleman. Before I delete your nasty innuendos I will link them to Young Cosmos so Sal can respond to you there.
Done.
Hey Alan,
Did it ever occur to you Davison is fucking with your head complaining about blocked access to ATBC?
Probably not, because it would never occur to you that Davison is smarter than you are.
He undoubtedly is. Not because John’s a super genius, mind you, but because you’re a super dumbass like all the other chance worshippers.
I love a good mystery to solve so I followed up an obvious clue in the obvious way clue about John’s secret benefactor here. I googled the phrase “darwinian witches”. Only two hits. One was meaningless but the other warn’t…
Intelligent Design The FutureDarwinian witches fly around in witches brooms, hats and black capes in scientific academia in order to feel more confident in they’re magical propositions. …
cayman.globat.com/~trademarksnet.com/RobertMarks/InTheNews/070825_EvolInf/070720_interview.htm – 548k – Cached – Similar pages
Interesting, no?
—————————————————————————————————–
Hi false davescot,
Very interesting, in fact I’m quite surprised at the results myself. And what exactly do you think this indicates?
Lets say for a moment that I am whoever posted that same phrase on another blog, what actual difference do you think that would make in your mind parallel to this blog and its purpose?
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
BTW, I deleted your comment following this one, no need to repeat.
Damn. The trail went dead cold there.
I might note just because Marks’ name came up it doesn’t look like he was actually the one who used the phrase. The grammar pretty much sucks in what little google coughed up for me. Someone didn’t even know to use “their” instead of “they’re”. Marks I don’t think would make those errors. We might be looking for someone with no college education and didn’t get good grades in high school either or possibly someone whose first language isn’t english.
—————————————————————————————————-
LOL, this is quite funny, is this some sort of investigation captain Alan Fox has carried out? Well, good luck with it, hope you find your man!
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
P.S: So far, a rather pathetic job in emulating DaveScot from UD
anonymous benefactor
Unless sumpin changed john’s got a dial up modem which means a different IP within some bigger block his ISP owns every time he dials in.
As I recall, since I once banned jad from ud by ip block so he couldn’t even read the site (great fun that) I didn’t have to block a very large range. He’s in a small vermont town with a commensurately small dial-up bank answering the number so they don’t use a big block of dynamic IPs to service it. I didn’t feel there was much risk of blocking innocent others.
If jad isn’t just messing with people given that he says he’s seeing atbc posts from 2005 he’s probably just on the starting page of the thread and doesn’t realize it. I can’t imagine a cache or proxy problem with data so stale it’s 3 years old. Of course wesley could actually be fucking with john too and I wouldn’t put it past him.
And by the way, I read more your writing and caught you using “your” when you should have used “you’re” which is a grammar sin about the same as the “their” and “they’re” so whoever wrote that snippet in the google hit for “darwinian witches” is more likely to be you. A good mystery. I tried googling a few more of what were idiosyncratic things I saw in your writing but no joy. Keep writing. I need more clues. Thanks.
————————————————————————————————–
Hi again false davescot,
It seems you must have gotten lost on the world wide web. This is not Shakespeare.com, nor is it a online spelling B contest.
Lets just hope your not a bot traversing blogs and correcting spelling and grammatical errors given your own. “sumpin” is not a word the last I checked, “wesley” is name of a person, names of people (even the Darwimps) always start off with a capital letter, that’s just the beginning correction phase of your complete disaster of a comment. Lets also hope your AI has self-correcting mechanisms on top of the learning and decision making ones.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
DaveScot/David Springer
Since when is it David Scott Springer’s concern who my “anonymous benefactor” is? Why has Springer graced my blog while he denies me access to his which he rules with an iron fist?
What does he hope to accomplish with this intrusion into my weblog? Hasn’t he read the criteria I presented in my welcome thread? I do not welcome those who cannot contribute anything of substance to the purposes of this blog. This is not a “groupthink” like Uncommon Descent, Pharyngula and Panda’s Thumb. It is also not a sewing circle of illiterate genetic trash like After The Bar Closes and EvC.
Why is Springer so conerned about the identity of my “anonymous benefactor?” I certainly am not. I will accept support anywhere, anytime from anyone. That is the way it is when one is computer incompetent, not to mention senile.
“Never look a gift horse in the mouth.”
anonymous?
Now if Springer wants to contribute to the substance and purpose of this weblog, I recommend he begin. Otherwise I will have to delete his comments and remove him from the user list as he has done twice to me at Uncommon Descent, a sadistic pleasure he will never again enjoy.
Got that Springer? Write that down.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A. Davison
Thanks for exposing yourself.
I love it so!
————————————————————————————————–
Hi John,
Whoever it is, its doing a poor job trying to emulate DaveScot. I have read a lot of DaveScot, I’m 99.99 percent certain based on mere intuition that this ain’t DaveScot, although whatever it is, its obvious that it wishes to be. DaveScot claims to have banned you once from UD, yet you have stated that you were banned multiple times.
———————————————————————————————-
Hi Anonymous benefactor.
I don’t agree. I believe it is DaveScot/David Springer. Why would anyone want to pose as David Springer?
DaveScot dropped me twice from Uncommon Descent along with my papers. He was not responsible for the first “banination,” but three times and I am out of Uncommon Descent. If Dembski would relieve Springer of his “author” role as blogcar I would have plenty to contribute to his forum and Dembski knows it. The ball has always been in Dembski’s court assumimg he is in charge at Uncommon Descent which is problematic if you ask me. Denyse is letting me hold forth at Overwhelming Evidence in any event. All this protectionist, isolationist nonsense reflects poorly on the “ID movement.” It always has.
JAD
————————————————————————————————-
Anonymous benefactor again
However, if my uncertainty rate being at .01 is actually the case, then I’d be rather disappointed since I have a lot of respect for the real DaveScot. “chance worshippers” would be something that the original DaveScot would use as a trademark at the end of sentences or paragraphs so I’m not sure what to make out of that, his e-mail address is also correct but may have just been changed for imitation purposes. However, when you do register to wordpress.com blogs you have to confirm your account through the e-mail address you specify (like most blogs). “Fucking” is also not a word I hear DaveScot using frequently, unless he thinks this blog is a pigsty (such as pharyngula) compared to other blogs then I could see him using that word once, even twice (which evidently, he did use). I’m also not sure about the timing of davescot’s comments, I took a quick sample of DaveScot (from UD) time periods in which comments are added and they don’t match the approx 1900 military time he posted comments here. Anyhow, I think my sampling rate is a bit too small and doesn’t provide much on statistics to indicate the probability advantageous to davescot actually being DaveScot or in reverse.
Why DaveScot would suddenly launch a complex specified idiosyncratic phrase attack (CSIPA) on me seems very odd, its also mind boggling that he has this much time on his hands given he has better things to do on UD. Alan Fox (aka Captain Sherlock Darwimp) doesn’t even care that much unless this is somehow part of his scheme rendering Alan Fox Captain Sherlock Darwimp the schemer.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
P.S: As to those who wish to somehow extrapolate the answer to the question of interest “who I am”, does it matter? Does it make a difference? Will this change anything in particular, the world perhaps? Apart from holding degrees in Computer and Network Eng and nothing in the Biological Sciences, I have little if anything to contribute scientifically. If you haven’t noticed, this is John’s blog, not mine. I have helped him set it all up and promised to administer it from time to time, that’s about all folks!
————————————————————————————————–
Incidentally “chance worshippers” originated with me I believe.
JAD
Sorry Alan but, true to my word, I deleted your comments as promised.
A man is only as good as his word don’t you know.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
Come to think of it I can’t drop Springer or Fox from the user list because they have never registered for this blog. I guess I will just have to get used to intrusions from homozygous trash whenever it suits their fancy.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
In retrospect I’m pretty sure DaveScot is David Springer under the influence of one or more stiff drinks.
I see Alan Fox has surfaced once more. I’ll let his comments stand until noon and then delete them.
Incidentally, I no longer have a dial-up connection which is why Dingleberry can now block me: one of the few virtues of dial-up connections. They are just too darn slow. I now get telephone, TV and internet all for one Ben Franklin per month courtesy of Comcast. If they jack up the rates after a year I may return to dial-up.
Interesting. I’m really DaveScot so benefactor’s grammar errors proved a reliable indicator that he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed and Alan Fox somehow believed it wasn’t really me too which strengthens my take on him as well. JAD to his credit didn’t doubt it was me only thought I’d had something to drink. The latter was incorrect but understandable given I avoided my shift key for a few sentences just for a lark. Once again a confirmation that JAD is the sharpest tool in this particular shed which makes it even more likely that he’s just screwing around with Alan and Wesley and anyone who’ll rise to the bait he set out.
I was interested in benefactor for the reason I gave initially – I love a mystery. Benefactor shouldn’t delete repeats if he misses them the first time through.
It also seems a little odd that Davison doesn’t get upset by a voice in the sky appending stuff to comments and deleting other comments wholesale which probably means JAD knows the identity of the benefactor and is keeping it secret at the behest of the benefactor.
Anyhow, this is the first time I visited this blog. It seems I’m unwelcome although I’m certain Davison invited me to comment here many times from the Brainstorms forum where I got this link. But Davison’s memory is either selective or defective or both so it’s no surprise he wouldn’t recall inviting me. In any case there’s no particular I can think of for visiting here again so I shan’t. Hasta la bye bye.
————————————————————————————————–
You are very welcome to stay and participate, that is if you’re indeed the real DaveScot and not some Darwinbot Alan Fox sent over from the trashcan pharyngula or the swamp AtBC (I promise not to append too or delete anymore of your comments). For the record, you and Alan Fox are both wrong for suspecting I am Sal Cordova.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
P.S. If it is Sal, and I think it probably is, your month in exile is up and you can resume posting on UD now but keep the homo bashing toned down below x-rated in the future. And watch you’re [sic] grammar because their [sic] watching us.
DaveScot aka David “I love being right” Springer.
You don’t seem to understand. You are very welcome here just as everyone is. The only criterion I have is that users have something of value to offer. You have offered nothing relating to the purposes of this weblog.
I wouldn’t dream of blocking you anyway because if I did I would be descending to your level. Your record speaks volumes as to your character. You are no different than every other egomaniacal, cowardly blowhard who finds it necessary to silence his critics. Go ban someone from UD, if there is anyone left worthy of your attention.
I doubt very much if “anonymous benefactor” is Sal Cordova. I am pretty sure I know who it is but my lips are sealed. It doesn’t matter anyway.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
David “my IQ is north of 150″ Springer,
I have set out no bait. I am blocked from viewing After The Bar Closes and I am angry about it. Like ARN and richarddawkins.net, dingleberry has resorted to the bottom of the barrel. I am surprised you haven’t done the same thing with UD and “brainstorms.” It is my opinion that you now are in charge of both blogs. Throw your weight around Dinger. We all know how much it means to you.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/galpagos_album_marine_iguana.php
Quick look before Pee Zee deletes it. I am George Sorrros in # 20
I am still alive and even managed to evoke a comment to which I responded. At 5:50 I asked Sven to wake up PeeZee, the second biggest bully in cyberdumb.
This is more fun than a barrel of monkeys! The trick is to hide your identity which I hate to do. In the past I have always let PeeZee know exactly who I was. That makes for rapid deletion.
I can’t believe Pee Zee hasn’t deleted me yet. It is going on 7PM! Maybe he died.
In typical Pee Zee fashion, every trace of my invasion has now been erased and the thread has come to an end. Pee Zee gives that word “ejaculations” a whole new meaning.
He is a coward.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
Pharyngula goes on, often with a dozen threads a day, not one of which addresses the only matter which has ever been in question – the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution. Myers has completely abandoned evolutionary science just as Richard Dawkins has. They are helpless victims of their prescribed destiny to be intellectual losers who have contributed absolutely nothing to our understanding of the great mystery of our origins. They never will.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Alan Fox
I will let your unfounded invective stand for all to savor until noon. In the meantime -
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=14
is what I get when I click on After The Bar Closes.
So much for Alan Fox’s claim that I am not blocked from viewing After The Bar Closes.
I love it so!
Isn’t it interesting that while I freely criticize and expose the position and tactics of my adversaries, they very rarely mention me or my papers? It is only when I am able to “penetrate their security” that my name is even mentioned. I interpret this absence to indicate powerful evidence for the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis. Surely if the notion of a determined evolution is without foundation, I should be swamped with ridicule . Where are my critics? Who recognizes my thesis? I will now answer that question.
The Darwinian zealots have historically pretended that they never had any critics. From Mivart to Osborn to Bateson, Punnett, Berg, Goldschmidt, Schindewolf, Grasse, Lovtrup, and currently Davison; the reaction has always been the same. We do not exist, we must not exist and we will not exist.
The reason this is possible has recently been disclosed; it is because the way we interpret the world has a heritable foundation beyond our capacity to alter. You see some of us are “natural born,” “dyed-in-the-wool,” “born that way,” “prescribed” atheists. It is as simple as that. Others, including myself, are genetically immune to such a malaise. It is this congenital polarization that is largely responsible for the stalemate that characterizes the present scene.
While composing this message I suddenly realized that I had neglected to list William Wright’s book “Born That Way” on the side bar. It is there now.
Just as important is the reading material we subconciously choose to consume.
“He that I am reading seems always to have the most force.”
Montaigne
I recommend avoiding the sources I have listed under “Darwinian Sorcery” in favor of the material I have listed under “Important Books.”
I remain convinced that we are all victims in a perfectly determined universe exactly as Einstein maintained to his dying day -
“Everything is determined…by forces over which we have no control.”
It may be that there is nothing we can do to alter our personal destinies. If that is true I can state with confidence that Paul Zachary Myers, Richard Dawkins, Wesley Elsberry and every other advocate of the Darwinian fantasy will soon be nothing but pathetic little footnotes in the history of evolutionary science.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Alan Fox
I am a published scientist. Why should I field questions I have posed and answered in the peer reviewed literature? I’ll give you 1 hour to make an ass of yourself this time. Any further mindless, insolent submissions will be dealt with as they appear. I recommend you retire to After The Bar Closes to bitch about me there where I cannot respond. You won’t even do that because Der Fuhrer doesn’t like to have my name mentioned. Everybody knows that. Enjoy your hour in the sun and ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for Paul Zachary Myers, Richard Dawkins, Wesley Elsberry and atheist Darwinian zealots like yourself generally.
“Darwinians of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your natural selection.”
After Karl Marx
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John, if you are only seeing posts from 2005 at that link, then you are looking at them in reverse chronological order. Go to the bottom of the page where there are drop down menus. You should see that you are looking at the topics by last post date and sorted in ascending order. If you change that to descending order and hit the Go! button and you will see the most recent topics at the top of the page again.
However, be aware that you are not among the current topics of conversation.
terryfillups
That is interesting but how did that reversal ever take place? I didn’t do anything. I will try what you suggest.
I did as you suggested and received the folowing message -
“No topics were found. This is either because there are no topics in the forum, or the topics are older than the current cut-off.”
It is perfectly obvious that this computer is being blocked by ATBC just as it is by ARN and richarddawkins.net
Of course I am not being mentioned. Der Fuhrer is terrified of me. So is PeeZee Myers. Don’t take my word for it -
“Davison is the Darwinians’ worst nightmare.”
Terry Trainor
Since Trainor has since deleted me, apparently I am now the Creationists’ worst nightmare too!
The only other places I can now present my heresies are Overwhelming Evidence, “brainstorms” and Young Cosmos and God or Gods only know(s) how long that will last. All it takes to get on the Creationists’ list is to postulate more than one God and “He” better be alive and kicking too. Nobody knows squat about God(s). Even dead Gods are unacceptable to the Darwimps.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“Oooooooooh, how sweet it is.”
Jackie Gleason
As a long dead friend of mine used to say -
“It’s invenereal to me.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=94#001410
My comment I just posted.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/shame_on_minnesota.php#comments
Paul Zachary Myers is complaining about security actions taking place in Minneapolis prior to the Republican Convention beginning tomorrow. You would think the Minneapolis police were Nazi Storm Troopers; he describes them as thugs. And look at the knee-jerk applause of his loyal followers, 95 percent of whom are anonymous nothings. It is all very revealing.
I repeat my prediction that by next February Pharyngula will be a pathetic embarrassment to every serious student of the great mystery of organic evolution. It is already little more than a magnet for political insurrectionists and illiterate genetic misfits. Pharyngula has now and never had anything to do with the only issue that has ever been at stake – the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution, a planned sequence in which chance has played no role whatever.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=94#001414
I just posted this at “brainstorms.”
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=94#001416
Be sure to follow this demonstration that Pee Zee is terrified of me and my sources.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=95#001418
Here is another revelation from the premier American atheist biologist – just posted.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/node/508#comment-2104
Alan Fox continues his pathological obsession with me. He is the perfect example of what Spiro Agnew meant when he described his adversaries as -
“the nattering nabobs of negativity.”
Alan Fox has never offered a constructive thought in his entire miserably inadequate existence.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
I have neglected this thread for nearly a month so I will offer a few thoughts to keep the thread alive.
I honestly believe that it is essential to the human persona to have something to loathe. It is the sine qua non for a productive life. Now I know some are not going to like that but there is nothing you can do about it: so let me amplify.
I am convinced that many (but not all) couples stay married so they can have someone to loathe first thing in the morning. This can explain why when one of them dies, the other often quickly follows as he or she has suddenly been deprived of that basic requisite for an adjusted existence.
For my part what would I do if I didn’t have Paul Zachary “godless liberal” Myers, Christopher “hickup” Hitchens and Richard “blind mountaineering watchmaker” Dawkins to loathe with all my waning energies? I am certain I would have given up the ghost long ago if it were not for those tempting targets, those challenges which simply MUST be met. They represent living proof of what Arnold Toynbee called “the virtues of adversity.”
It is a dirty job but someone has to do it. It might as well be someone who really likes his work!
I love it so!
Just some thoughts on a Sunday morning.
P.S. copied to Pharyngula.
The evidence that Myers is terrified of me is the fact that he allows me to communicate with him. Otherwise he would block me.
Dr Davison,
Johnny Cash said, “It’s good to know who hates you, and it’s good to be hated by the right people.”
I think you’ll agree that you’re hated by all the right people for all the right reasons.
Keep up the good work!
Daniel
Thank you Daniel. It is encouraging to gain a few more supporters.
Our leaders, both political and scientific, have thousands of devoted followers. We now have atheist sponsored day camps for our youth reminiscent of the Hitler Jugend of Nazi Germany and, for the first time, a declared atheist in the House of Representatives, not surprising, a Democrat from the State of California.
The United States is on the brink of extinction both economically, ethically and morally, largely due to the pervasive influence of congenital far left liberal relativists like P.Z. Myers, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and, I must add, Barack Obama, Christopher Dodd and Howard Dean. They all have become the new heroes of the ultra-liberal left.
We have already out lived the two centuries that have characterized most great civilizations in the past. We have lost our fiber as a result of the great affluence we have gained from the Industrial Revolution and the Age of Technology which I believe to be the last great Age for the final product of a planned evolution – ourselves. To make matters worse, we have destroyed our planet in the process and it is much too late to do anything about it.
I realize others may not share my political views and that is fine with me. I became convinced long ago that political liberalism and Darwinian atheism are pleiotropic expressions of the same “prescribed” genetic constitution. We are all victims in Einstein’s determined universe. Some of us have been luckier than others.
I am also convinced that there must have once been two Gods at least, one benevolent, the other malevolent.
We are now witnessing the final violent death throes of a planned scenario which can only end in extinction.
If some think I am unduly pessimistic, I recommend Martin Rees’ “Our Final Century,” James Lovelock’s “The Revenge of Gaia, and Tim Flannery’s “The Weather Makers,” all on my list of Important Books on the side bar. I sincerely hope we are all wrong.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John writes:
I honestly believe that it is essential to the human persona to have something to loathe. It is the sine qua non for a productive life. Now I know some are not going to like that but there is nothing you can do about it: so let me amplify.
No John, it is absolutely essential to the human persona to have something to love. In your twisted case your in love with your negative emotions. You live for loathing. I suppose as a last resort short of taking a long walk on a short pier that works as a reason to get out of bed in the morning. Did your dog die or do you loathe him too?
Love? That is precious coming from the most intolerant bully in the history of the internet.
Just because I loathe Texas trash like you doesn’t mean I loathe everyone. I love the truth and all those who have sought and found it in science as elsewhere.
You are no better than Meyers and Elsberry, using exactly the same tactics of summary banishment and arrogant, snotty insult. You are entirely self absorbed, with one goal only, to establish supremacy for yourself whatever the cost. You are an intellectual terrorist, the Osama bin Laden of the internet. You have infected and now dominate Uncommon Descent. The way O’leary and Dembski tolerate you after the way you have treated them is the proof of your success.
Congratulations.
I wouldn’t delete anything you say here for the world so hold forth. Let it all hang out. It is always with ones own words that one exposes himself.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
I have outlived 7 dogs all of whom I loved as they loved me. The first was a mongrel followed by three wire-haired terriers, then three Dachshunds. I am now in love with my eighth dog, a Miniature Poodle named Sumbitch who adores me as I adore him. Since he is only 17 months old he will probably be my last.
Love thyself Springer if you get my drift and be sure to clean up after yourself.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/what_didnt_happen_in_springfie.php#comments
The pictures of the beer-swigging blowhard are worth a thousand words. What a jerk!
I love it so!
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-98.html
Note that the recently revealed atheist David “I love being right” Springer still hasn’t returned to defend his absurd claim that there is no role for the supernatural in the origin and evolution of the animate world.
A man is as good as his word, so we all now know what kind a man Dinger is. He is the kind that does not keep his word.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/will_the_availability_of_csect.php#comments
Check this gem out. Paul Zachary “randomly ejaculating” Myers now claims that C sections will lead to babies with bigger brains. Pinch me please. Tell me I imagined this!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=98#001466
Just posted and I feel an important message.
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=99#001485
Just sent.
I love it so!
Since I have been banished from particpation at Overwhelming Evidence, I have removed that blog from the side bar. Patrick, whoever that is, prefers the mindless drivel of Alan Fox to the observations of a real scientist.
In case you missed it, I just deleted a comment by Alan Fox in which he threatened to disclose my email correspondence with him. I wonder where he is going to do that: maybe Overwhelming Evidence where he is welcome, or Pharyngula, or After The Bar Closes?
Get cracking you slimy worm. You are through polluting this blog representing the genetic garbage of Esley Welsberry’s “After The Bar Closes.” Do what you have to do. That is the way it is supposed to be, the way is was “prescribed” to be.
“Oooooooooh, how sweet it is.”
Jackie Gleason
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
For the record and just posted -
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=99#001488
I’ve commented John’s banisment at OE. Just for a record – the post might be deleted soon, who knows? –
It’s a pity that professor Davison has been banned. “Alan Fox” from AtBC forum commented not only professor’ opinions, but also professor Davison real surname in a way that is unacceptable in a decent society. It was “Alan Fox” who should have been reprimanded by administrator firstly, not professor Davison. But administrator cared obviously more about “Alan Fox’s” freedom of denigration and then of his own – Patrick’s – ego than for a balanced moderation.
Thank you Martin.
I predict that Overwhelming Evidence will wither and die now that we are not able to speak freely there. Patrick is a weakling, easily manipulated by trash like Alan Fox. They deserve each other.
The nice thing about it is the way Fox has once again exposed himself as nothing but the tool of the Darwinian establishment, a mindless little messenger of the garbage science that typifies Panda’s Thumb, After The Bar Closes and Pharyngula.
Overwhelming Evidence is finished as a venue for meaningful discussion. Denyse O’Leary has abandoned it to Patrick, whoever that is.
I love it so!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
“Let my enemies destroy each other.”
Salvador Dali
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=99#001491
Here, just sent, is some more vintage David “I love being right” Springer. Does he have anything good to say about anybody these days? Not that I have noticed.
Follow the links and enjoy.
Professor Davison
I wonder if you can tell me what happened to an earlier comment of mine. I can no longer seem to find it.
You may be interested to note that DaveScot has stopped commenting at Uncommon Descent. There have been other changes, although the link to your papers remains for the moment.
Also it seems ISCID website is being mothballed. See this page. Can you still comment there?
Sorry the link does not seem to work.
http://www.iscid.org/contact.php
Maurice Caldwell
Thank you for the information and the link. I am glad that Dembski is leaving the Archives intact as I have several papers there along with some revealing responses from my enemies. I hope they will remain as a matter of record of the imminent demise of the atheist inspired Darwinian fairy tale.
I just left a message at “brainstorms” earlier today.
If for whatever reason Springer no longer comments at Uncommon Descent, I would be delighted to resume contributing there myself. That is if Dembski does not object to my brand of Creationism!
Thanks again.
Martin
It is not “a pity that I have been banned at Overwhelming Evidence;” I want nothing to do with such a forum, one which contributes absolutely nothing to our understanding of anything. It is nothing but another shabby little empire run by a shabby little tyrant. The web teems with such “prescribed” genetic trash.
I love it so!
I also emailed Micah Sparacio who managed “brainstorms,” expressing my hope that the forum will reman open. To paraphrase W.C. Fields about hating children and dogs –
“Any forum where I am allowed to speak can’t be all bad.”
I love it so!
Maurice Caldwell
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/emphatic-non-buttressation-of-id/#comments
Are you sure Springer is through contributing at Uncommon Descent? I suspect it was Springer himself who spread that rumor. “The one” still rules Uncommon Descent with his ruthless, iron fist.
Alan Fox is now welcome at each of the following blogs. Overwhelming Evidence, Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, After The Bar Closes, EvC, richarddawkins.net and God only knows how many other bastions of Godless Darwinian mysticism. I am proud to have been banished from the same list.
Dear Governor Pawlenty
I am an alumnus of the University of Minnesota, having received my Ph.D. in Zoology in 1954.
I have for some time been concerned about the behavior of Paul Zachary Myers, Associate Professor of Biology at the Morris campus of the University. His rabid attacks on our most treasured institutions give me great concern both for the University and for the citizens of the State of Minnesota. I have written to the Provost and received neither acknowledgement nor reply. I complained to the Board of Regents and received a reply from the Chancellor of the Morris campus supporting Myers’ right to say what he wants. Minnesota has become a center for Universal Atheism largely due to the pervasive influence of this man and his hundreds of devoted followers. It shows in the presence of another foul mouthed atheist, Al Franken, poised to become a member of Congress. I want you to know my feelings with the hope that you might use your influence as Governor and ex-officio member of the Board of Regents to expose and counter, as I have and continue to do, Myers’ corrosive influence which I believe extends far beyond the borders of the State of Minnesota. It is especially important now that we have elected a man to the Presidency with extremely uncertain purposes. I see the future of the Republic to be in grave jeopardy.
Sincerely yours,
John A. Davison, Professor Emeritus of Biology, University of Vermont. Mailing address: L4 Grandview Drive, South Burlington, VT 05403
email – nosivadaj@msn.com
weblog – jadavison.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________________
I also managed to send this on to Myers via his one way communication system at Pharyngula.
I love it so!
Professor Davison asks:
Are you sure Springer is through contributing at Uncommon Descent?
Dr Dembski has announced he has quit Uncommon Descent and handed over the control of the site to a lawyer called Barry Arrington. It is no secret that he (Arrington) is not well-disposed toward DaveScot, as Arrington is a fervent Southern Baptist and DaveScot usually represents himself as an atheist. I don’t expect to see any new threads from DaveScot. Let’s see if I can beat you at predictions!
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Maurice,
I’ll call you on your prediction. Although, I think you’re wrong.
Remember that BarryA is only replacing Dembski as the “big boss” while DaveScot is still given administrative “bannination” privileges. DaveScot is now unable to ban BarryA even if he wanted too, the reverse maybe true. IMO, I think DaveScot was being paid for his “service” to UD, you’ve got to hand it to him, he has invested a lot of his personal time and I seriously doubt he did it entirely on his own behalf. I would argue DaveScot put the most effort out of all UD admins combined and deserves a lot of credit for that. Overall, he did a good job defending ID and although he is not a Christian he is certainly entitled to his own personal beliefs, whatever those maybe. However, the way DaveScot argues for design is sketchy as John A. Davison and I have noted. He argues for a designed by non-designer (or Aliens didit) hypothesis, how that differs from Darwinian evolution is beyond our capacity to understand (my capacity at least). If hes arguing for designed parameters embedded into the universe then how again does that not require a designer? Its not important anyhow, due to his “bannination” of many ID proponents (especially John A. Davison), I don’t mind someone banning him for a change or putting his comments in moderation queue.
sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/954/
(Link to first appearance of Mr Arrington at UD)
Maurice and “anonymous benefactor”
I don’t recall David Springer ever describing himself as an atheist: an agnostic yes but an atheist no. He apparently believes that it is intrinsic in matter to become animate and then evolve. Michael Denton seems to be on that same track. I don’t believe that for a millisecond and I don’t see how anyone else can.
First causes are sticky things to deal with but they cannot be ignored.
If Springer still has the right to ban anyone he chooses, Uncommon Descent will never amount to a hill of beans. I would enjoy participating there as I am sympathetic to its originally stated goals but that will never take place as long as Springer has the power to ban anyone. He is a genetic, “prescribed” bully.
Springer is the perfect example of Einstein’s quip -
“It is abhorrent to me when a fine intelligence is paired with an unsavory character.”
I further believe that EVERYTHING Springer does is on his own behalf. He is a power crazed egomaniac, totally lacking in principle or compassion. He actually revels in the denigration of others. If Arrington can’t rid UD of Springer, nothing has changed. Springer parasitized Uncommon Descent long ago with one goal in mind. It was to dominate it with his own personal agenda. It shows in his own words -”I love being right” and “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.” He bans or intimidates any or all that disagree with him. We will soon see if anything has changed at Uncommon Descent.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/whats-new-at-ud/#more-3807
Well this answers the question about who is in charge at Uncommon Descent. Springer is still the primary “moderator,” “chief banninator” and “tyrant in chief.” Good luck to Uncommon Descent.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/pz_myers_naked.php#more
And here, in all his pompous glory, is the second biggest bully in cyberdumb, basking in his inflated ego, oblivious to the fact that his atheist Darwinian world is about to sink into the same swamp that long ago swallowed the Phlogiston of Chemistry and the Ether of Physics. Myers and Springer make a lovely pair of egomaniacal, intolerant blowhards don’t you think?
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like hell it is!
I love it so!
They both suffer from a total lack of the one essential feature of every true scientist – HUMILITY. They each know it all and will tolerate no departure from their stated positions. Neither is capable of error and both delight in the denigration of their adversaries, real or imagined. As George Wallace once said –
“There’s not a dimes worth of difference.”
I love it so!
Hi John,
Miller has the personality of stale bread, how anyone can even stomach his blog is beyond me. I think the few seconds that they showed him on expelled is proof what a utter buffoon he is.
Dublin
Who is Miller?
Check this out folks -
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/one-third-of-british-teachers-think-id-or-creationism-okay/#comment-297749
especially Springer’s pontification 11/15, 2008 11:13 PM.
Springer claims evolution is going on all the time. That can offer an explanation for why I am persona non grata at Uncommon Descent.
There is not a scintilla of evidence for progressive evolution of any sort. There hasn’t been a new Genus in two million years and not a new documented species in historical times. Quite the contrary, extinction is rampant with whole habitats disappearing with their endemic species due to the destruction of our physical environment. If there ever was a time for evolutionary progress through Darwinian means it would be right now. It simply is not taking place. Phylogeny, exactly as ontogeny still IS, WAS a self-limiting phenomenon no longer in progress.
“The one” also thinks evolution requires (required) vast periods of time which is also dead wrong. Every real evolutionary event was instantaneous, preprogrammed and completely irreversible.
In short, David “I love being right” Springer is now and probably always was a Darwinian!
Just imagine how long I would have lasted at Uncommon Descent if I had posted this comment there where Springer still reigns supreme. He would not even have allowed it to appear. Congenital bullies are like that don’t you know.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like Hell it is!
I love it so!
I know you are listening David. Just remember -
you, like every other ideologue of whatever persuasion, are always welcome here. That is what makes this weblog unique.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/adminstrative/no-atheisttheist-slugfest-here/#respond
Atheists in biological science should not only be antagonized; they should be ridiculed, exposed and denigrated unless of course, like David “I love being right” Springer, you happen to be one yourself!
There was never a great biologist who was a professed atheist.
I love it so!
Also
http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000370&p=100#001502
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Professor Davison
Looks like I was wrong in the short term, but, relax. I still get the impression that Mr Arrington’s tolerance of DaveScot is limited. That blog ain’t big enough for the both of them! You should try re-engaging with Ms O’Leary. I am sure she has supported your views in the background and still has influence at UD. She could be a useful ally in getting you back center stage.
See Mr Arrington’s statement here: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theismatheism-discussions/
<blockquoteFor example, there is some terrific news on today’s Drudge Report once again debunking global warming, and I was tempted to write a post linking to it. But we have decided that global warming discussions are not within our mission, and we will no longer post on that topic. I interpret that as a pretty big slap in the face for DaveScot.
Oops excuse missing tag. You should ask Anon Benefactor to rig you up a preview or edit facility on comments.
Lets try that again!
See Mr Arrington’s statement here:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theismatheism-discussions/
Thanks Maurice Caldwell.
I regard Barry Arrington as being on trial. He is a sincere Christian yet he is using a flaming, intolerant, egomaniacal blowhard as his moderator. That is unacceptable. I’ll give him another week to muzzle Springer. I have probably already blown it with Arrington as I just called him either a spineless wimp or a congenital masochist. At eighty I don’t have the patience any more do deal with all the crap that characterizes internet politics. The best thing that could ever happen to Springer is to be forced to have his own weblog as he has forced me and many others. The man is a textbook bully.
I don’t have much patience with O’Leary any more either. She is now questioning that we and chimps have a common ancestor. That kind of nonsense won’t wash any more with this investigator.
O’Leary turned Overwhelming Evidence over to Patrick, whoever that is, who proved to be another wimp who is more interested in cultivating Alan Fox than he is in giving voice to Martin and myself.
In any event you won’t find me groveling and scraping to comment again at Uncommon Descent or any other blog from which I have been banished, especially when it has been by trash like David Springer. I’ll bet Arrington hasn’t got the guts to sack Springer. He is probably scared to death of him, just like Dembski probably was.
I began publishing evidence for Intelligent Design nearly a half century ago with my essay “Animal organization as a problem in cell form,” in “Form and Strategy in Science: Studies Dedicated to Henry Woodger on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday.” D. Reidel Publishing Company / Dordrecht-Holland. 1964.
These “johnny-come-latelys” with their precious “ID movement” bore me to tears. The “ID movement” is a figment of their imagination. Intelligent design is implicit in the work of every one of my sources. It is a given from which all real inquiry begins. It certainly is not a subject for debate.
Most of these stupid weblogs are little more than therapy for intellectual lightweights, malcontents and transparent sociopaths like David Springer, Paul Zachary Myers and Wesley Ellsberry. Ninety-nine percent of their clientele have nothing to offer about anything. Their greatest joy is to see their cowardly anonymous drivel temporarily scrawled on the ephemeral blackboard of cyberspace.
Who is the “we” to which you refer when you say “we have decided that global warming discussions are not within our mission,…”
Are you part of the Uncommon Descent administration? It sounds like you are.
As for anthropogenic global warming, David “I love being right” Springer has never bought it anyway so he would be delighted at what might be “dredged up” on the great “Drudge Report.” The well named “Drudge Report” has just about as much credibility as “Wikipedia” on global warming or any other subject for that matter. Wikipedia dismissed Tim Flannery, author of “The Weather Makers,” as a “global warming alarmist.” Of course he is. So is James Lovelock, father of the Gaia hypothesis and Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society and author of “Our Final Century” and plenty of other real scientists including myself.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
Thanks for commenting.
This message was edited 11:15 P.M, November 16, 2008 and may be again.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Hi John,
Now this is hard to believe!!! DaveScot has “resigned” (although the proper term would be “banned”) from Uncommon Descent.
DaveScot is welcomed here as “author”. If his comments have no relation (ie: global warming) to the topic of “design detection” then comments will be placed in moderation queue.
sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
—————————————————————————————————
I beg your pardon “anonymous benefactor.” I will decide in what capacity Springer or anyone else is welcome here, not you. Everyone is welcome here but there will be no elitism. “Authors” at Uncommon Descent have the capacity to introduce threads and to ban and control those who comment on those threads. As far as I am concerned there will be no new threads unless I see a compelling reason to introduce them. Springer, like anyone else will be a “user.” I have no intention of altering the present configuration of this weblog to accommodate the goals of anyone.
There will also be no “moderation queue.” Anyone has the freedom to say whatever they want with the understanding that if I deem it to be without merit or demeaning to me or my “very few allies” in any way, they will be warned once and given the opportunity publicly to apologize before being banished should they persist in such behavior. It has always been my goal to offer a venue a cut above what characterizes the typical so called “internet forum” This weblog will not become a flame pit or a Mecca for like minded congenital ideologues like Pharyngula, EvC, ARN, richarddawkins.net, Panda’s Thumb or After The Bar Closes. It is my goal to leave a civil legacy defending my convictions concerning the causes of the two greatest mysteries in all of biological science – ontogeny and phylogeny. Those who are unable to participate in this most worthy enterprise need not contribute.
I doubt very much if David “I love being right” Springer will show any interest in participating here in any event. Rational discourse is beyond his means.
In future I recommend that you refrain from issuing public statements of policy concerning the mechanics of this weblog before conferring with me privately.
Sincerely,
John A. Davison
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Hi John,
I was merely trying to lure DaveScot here to respond, I didn’t want to make that clear since it’d be a give away. John, even if I did give springer authorization to be an “author” (which I wouldn’t), he’d only be given user rights plus ability to post new topics. He would have no rights to delete, edit or modify anything at all. I agree with you though, DaveScot will likely refuse to participate here anyways.
No hard feelings!
sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
__________________________________________________________________________________-
Anonymous benefactor.
No hard feelings but words have meaning and should be used with some care.
If Springer wants to come here he will come here. If he does he really should come with an apology for all the hideous things he has said about me and done to me over the years, things that have made it virtually impossible for us ever to be friends again. I really don’t care what he does any more. I too can quote the Bible.
As you sow, so shall you reap.
P.S. Sorry anonymous benefactor, but Springer will not be given the right to post new topics and neither will any one else. New topics will be posted when I feel they are pertinent. At present the six threads which are available are perfectly able to fulfill the objectives of this weblog. If some one wants to suggest a new thread I will be happy to consider it. The title is
John A. Davison’s Weblog. I foresee no changes in moderation policy either. I feel it is a God given right for every person to make a perfact ass of himself if he insists or, alternatively, to become a productive member of society if that is his goal. There isn’t much of a middle ground don’t you know.
I love it so!
It will be interesting to see how “the one” responds . It was cool the way Arrington used Springer’s own words in describing his departure –
“DaveScot is no longer with us.”
I love it so!
I offer my sincere apology to Barry Arrington for having called him “either a wimp or a congenital masochist.” It seems I misjudged him prematurely.
I would now be delighted once again to participate at Uncommon Descent if the management there could tolerate my rather minor departures from strict adherence to Judeo-Christian dogma and monotheism generally. I would welcome a password. My user name is John A. Davison.
I would like to have my two most recent essays added to the UD side board as well if that can be arranged.
If someone who can post there would transmit this message to Arrington, I would be very grateful.
Thanks in advance.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/aussie_prudes.php#comments
Here is another example of the daily hatespeech which has come to be the hallmark of Pharyngula. Myers makes Reverend Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers look like Mother Teresa.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like Hell it is!
No, Professor, I have never had any connection with UD, except I had some comments published there a while ago
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
I Googled ’sociopathy’ and came up with this great page. I now ask – doesn’t it describe perfectly the following -
Paul Zachary Myers
Richard Dawkins
Wesley Elsberry
David Springer
I think it does, especially the first ten.
What say others?
Hi John,
I think boot licker best describes Paul Zachary Myers.
Wrong Dublin.
The “bootlickers” are his thousands of adoring fans. That is what makes creeps like Myers, Dawkns and Hitchens so very dangerous.
Myers, like David “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” Springer, loves only himself and I hope they both continue to do so if you get my drift. Sociopaths are all like that.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
Here is another assortment of sociopaths from the political world.
Al Franken
Chris Dodd
Barney Frank
Nancy Pelosi
Harry Reid
I don’t know John,
It just seems Meyers just follows Dawkins, but I do agree with your assessment. People need to stop listening to Dawkins, and his flock.
Sorry,
Had to run with comment half-finished. I have never had any connection with UD, except I had some comments published there a while ago taking issue with DaveScot on climate change. All my comments were erased at a stroke and my account suspended.
I am not really concerned about the science issue. If something makes sense it will shine through, eventually. They say water runs downhill. You can test this for yourself. It’s hard to bullshit in science.
Maurice Caldwell
I agree with you.
I hope you feel as I do that evolution WAS planned, IS now finished and probably will never resume. That way there would be two pf us.
Of course you don’t have to agree with me here to opine freely: unlike some forums I will not mention.
As for DaveScot / David Springer, it is now “The Lord gaveth and the Lord tooketh away” at Uncommon Descent. It must be awful for him not to have someone to insult, bully and banish. Now, while he can’t banish any more, I am sure he will continue to bully and insult those who have the temerity to disagree with him. It is his nature to do so don’t you know.
Thanks for the comments.
________________________________________
Dublin
Myers and Dawkins became atheists at conception, just like religious fanatics did. I know that doesn’t sound right but that is what the evidence indicates. I recommend William Wright’s
“Born That Way.”
They were determined, “prescribed” to be allies.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
That is not all they do together!
“EVERYTHING is determined…by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein, my emphasis.
I love it so!
http://www.youngcosmos.com/blog/archives/291#comments
Just posted.
Assuming that I can never again be banished from Uncommon Descent at the whim of a “blogczar,” I now am requesting a password from Barry Arrington so I can contribute to the demise of the Darwinian fairy tale at Uncommon Descent, something I have been doing now for most of my professional life. My user name is John A. Davison.
I expect a response and, since I cannot communicate directly, expect those who can to do that on my behalf.
Thanks in advance to all my thousands of faithful supporters.
I love it so!
I just attempted to register at Uncommon Descent. I was given a password 13 characters in length one of which is a vertical symbol which I do not have on my keyboard. Naturally it did not work. I requested a reasonable password and my preferred user name, John A. Davison- not John Davison – which is what was offered. I would like to know who is in charge of registration that would resort to such shabby means. I doubt if I will receive any relief. It looks like little has changed at Uncommon Descent.
Imagine a gibberish password 13 characters in length. Who do they think they are kidding?
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Pardon my skepticism Barry Arrington. The ball is in your court. We’ll soon see if things have changed at Uncommon Descent.
Barry Arrington
I’ll tell you what I have in mind. I will wait until the weekend for a password. If one is not forthcoming, I will have to conclude that really nothing significant has changed at Uncommon Descent, that Uncommon Descent is still the protectionist, isolationist venue that it was all through the years when Dembski, through his blogczar David Springer, ruled it with an iron fist.
Springer once publicly explained why I was not welcome at UD by claiming that Dembski thought I was “nuts.” I do not regard that as a valid reason to deny access to any forum. I think a lot of people are “nuts.” I welcome all to speak here on this weblog and assure them that whatever they offer will remain long after they may or not prove to be worthy of continued civil discourse.
Actually it is hard to get yourself banned here. Isn’t it interesting that such a tolerant venue should have so few contributors?
As I have pointed out right here, I believe that a large fraction of the human population require something in there empty little lives to loathe. Without it they are insecure. Pharyngula, RichardDawkins.net, Panda’s Thumb and After The Bar Closes are the perfect examples of this human frailty. To a slightly lesser extent, EvC and ARN suffer from this same malaise. All these forums have hundreds of faithful followers each gravitating to that forum which best satisfies his natural and probably congenital biases.
When I started this weblog it was my hope that it would set a standard a cut above what I see around me. I believe it has done just that. And so it is only natural that I should measure other venues for the discussion of basic questions by the same standard I have established here.
What kind of a venue is it that must protect itself by denying others a chance to offer and defend their convictions? That is exactly what has happened to many of our institutions including even our most sacred institutions, our schools, colleges, universities and even some of our most prestigious scientific journals.
In any event, if Uncommon Descent is sincere in establishing new directions it will be delighted to reverse its previous policy of arbitrary exclusion which has far too long been the internet standard for communication.
Just as I welcome all here, I expect to be welcomed elsewhere. Those unable to comply with
this ideal will always be known by the means they have employed in the past as in the present.
There now. I feel somewhat better.
Professor Davison wrote:
That would be above my pay grade to comment.
I am more concerned with climate change, and how to get un-spun information about causes and effects.
BTW, it seems that “Patrick”, (whowever that is) has taken over moderating duties from DaveScot. I have had a look at “Overwhelming Evidence” and it appears you have had a bit of a disagreement with him. It might be worth trying to smooth things over with him if you want to get back in at UD, though, as far as I can tell, it is sliding into obscurity. I am afraid Ms O’Leary doesn’t have the charisma to generate traffic.
As a matter of fact I regard this weblog as one of the best. Where else are the most important questions being addressed, questions such as -
Was there a purpose in evolution or was it a matter of chance?
Is evolution still in progress? (I say no.)
Was evolution ever a gradual process? (I say no. Every evolutionary event was instantaneous.)
What is our future?
IS, or more precisely, WAS phylogeny, like ontogeny the unfolding of information present since the beginning or beginnings?
Is the death of the individual the counterpart to the extinction of the species?
I don’t see any of these questions being considered at Pharyngula, Panda’s Thumb, After the Bar Closes, RichardDawkins.net, EvC, ARN or at any of a number of other weblogs presumably dedicated to the question of our origins. I don’t see ANY questions being asked. Does anyone? Asking and answering questions is all that science has ever been about. When questions are no longer asked all progress stops.
Instead of questions what we see are collections of close minded, insular, isolationist malcontents lashing out at anyone who might take exception to the posture of their egomaniacal, self appointed leaders. The Darwinians no longer even bother to defend their silly, chance driven hypothesis, choosing instead to spend all all their energies attacking those who believe in a planned universe. Pathetic losers like Myers and Dawkins have abandoned science entirely to run around giving lectures on the virtues of atheism and getting paid for it! When they aren’t doing that they are recruiting new atheist followers and selling Tshirts, coffee mugs and bumper stickers in a frantic attempt to convert the whole world to Universal Atheism.
They remain totally oblivious to the reality that it was the Catholic Church that preserved Greek science all through the dark ages, the same Church that inspired James E. Woods to write “How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization.” Christianity, which served as the basis for all democracies since the Greeks, has become the object of spiteful derision in the hands of hate mongering ideologues like Paul Zachary Myers, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. What do they have to offer or to gain with these hideous tactics? Absolutely nothing is my answer. They are pathetic proofs that -
Everything is determined… by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
We are all victims of our determined fates. Some of us have been luckier than others.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Maurice Caldwell
I have no interest in trying to “smooth over” anything with anyone. That is not my style. What they see is what they get.
I recommend realclimate.org/
and
nature.com/climatefeedback
if you are interested in global warming.
Hi John,
I couldn’t agree with you more, I believe one day, Dawkins and his girlfriend Meyers will be forgotten. People will not understand how anyone could have flocked to two of the biggest intellectual frauds of our century.
Funny thing though John, why is Dawkins so set at trying to delude everyone that Hitler wasn’t a Darwinian?
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/hooray_for_catholics.php#comments
Myers is still bashing Catholics and Catholicism. And Pharyngula is a science blog? Who does he think he is kidding?
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=492571228db5d1cc;act=ST;f=14;t=5735;st=3120
This page is typical of the garbage that is “After the Bar Closes.” I call your attention in particuar to the message by k.e.., whoever that cowardly jerk is, in which he refers to me as “that F**king nut case.”
That is the sort of reference I relish most.
Thank you k.e.. you pathetic excuse for a human being.
SOCKITTOME!
I love it so!
Dublin or anyone else that would like to comment at Pharyngula. Pharyngula has an interesitng feature which I use all the time to torment Myers.
Scan down to the reponse box (any thread will do), enter your name and a real email address and send a message. You will then be thanked for your comment (which of course will never appear unless it is favorable to him). Do not negelect this opportunity to tell the worm how you feel about him. I do it all the time. It is great sport.
I love it so!
Hi John,
Will do, I just signed on.
Comment Submission Error
Your comment submission failed for the following reasons:
Too many comments have been submitted from you in a short period of time. Please try again in a short while.
Did they see me coming John?
I would like to say this was a error but I only submitted one comment? I hope Pharyngula was just emitted a error message but it happen to be a reply to some of the scum bad mouthing you John. I will continue and report back.
Dublin
Myers reads this blog religiously so he probably knows who you are.
That is typical of the second biggest bully in the history of internet communication. He lets my comments go through because he is terrified of me. He is not afraid of you so he blocks you. Myers is TRASH, cowardly, atheist nasty mouthed, snotty TRASH.
Got that Pee Zee you degenerate worm?
Now are you going to let that stand without a response Pee Zee? Sure you are because you are TRASH – homozygous “prescribed” TRASH.
You make me sick Myers. Got that? Write that down.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like HELL it is!
P.S. I recommend we not waste time on this weblog this way. email me Dublln and we will discuss such matters privately.
TRASH “A person or group of people regarded as worthless or contemptible.”
American Heritage Dictionary, definition #4.
Dublin
I do not believe that anyone at Pharyngula is “bad mouthing” me. I can’t find it. They are afraid to mention my name! Please do not claim things that are not true. It makes me irritable.
Barry Arrington
I see you have not provided me with a password. It is also my understanding that Patrick is now in charge of “moderation.” Is this the same Patrick that banished me from Overwhelming Evidence when I objected to the way he allowed Alan Fox to denigrate me there? I believe it is. Patrick should invite Alan Fox to contribute to Uncommon Descent as he did at Overwelming Evidence. Incidentally, Overwhelming Evidence is dead as a hammer since Martin and I can no longer speak there.
It is unfortunate that Uncommon Descent is continuing its isolationist, defensive posture. Nothing has changed there. The elitist “authors” are still the only ones who can introduce threads for discussion. The only real change seems to be the replacement of David Springer with Patrick, whoever that is.
I see no “new direction” at Uncommon Descent. I see the same old empty vessel, still wasting its time challenging the Darwinian disaster, still postulating “non-material” forces whatever that is supposed to mean, and still offering nothing new to explain the great mystery of phylogeny. There are no non-material forces. The very notion is absurd. Everything is material or it wouldn’t be here. Uncommon Descent might just as well fold its “big tent of Intelligent Design” and leave town.
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Please do not reply to this message as that would really be a “new direction” for Uncommon Descent. That is obviously out of the question.
Uncommon Descent, Pharyngula, EvC, ARN, After The Bar Closes, Panda’s Thumb, richarddawkins.net and every other forum from which Martin and I have been banished have all earned the distinction of being TRASH, as defined in the American Heritage Dctionary – definition #4.
TRASH – “A person or group of people regarded as worthless or contemptible.”
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
I will find it John.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/jam_this_signal_stat.php#comments
Here is another example of Pee Zee Myers exhorting his flock to “churn a poll.” And look at the response he generates. Don’t tell me this guy isn’t dangerous. He’s probably working for Obama.
It is hard tp believe isn’t it?
Like HELL it is!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/05/john_a_davison_is_such_a_tattl.php
WARNING – The last “blog” of Davison takes FOREVER to load. Don’t go there unless you must. Just trust me, it’s more of his insanity.
This is the trash they talk about, not science not debate. But trying to get people not to go on your site. I am sorry John, this is just insane.
______________________________________________________________________________
That is ancient history Dublin. As you know, since then I have written to Governor Pawlenty asking him to do something about Myers. You won’t find Myers exposing that letter on Pharyngula. It is right here on this thread if he wants to. (November 12, 2008, 8:27 AM). I now challenge Myers to reproduce that letter as a thread on Pharyngula and to open it up to contrubutions from his faithful herd of atheist followers. Incidentally, I have heard nothing back from Governor Pawlenty just as I heard nothing back from the Provost or from the Board of Trustees. So it seems that Paul Zachary Myers is free to continue spewing his hate without restraint. I still predict the creep will not reproduce the letter at Pharyngula. He knows that his behavior is finally catching up with him just as it is catching up with his idol Richard Dawkins. Neither of these two pompous clowns has ever published a significant word on the origin of species or of any other taxonomic category. They both live in the same fantasy world of an evolution driven by chance and natural selection, an evolution still in progress. Creative evolution stopped dead long ago and will never resume.
Now I recommend you stop complaining about Myers’ shabby behavior as it is a waste of time and space and accomplishes absolutely nothing. One’s actions define one’s character perfectly and require no further commentary. It is always with their own words and deeds that trash like Myers leave their indelible legacy. That is the way it is supposed to be, the way it was “prescribed” to be.
Also there is no debate and never has been. There is only discovery. Nothing more.
You piqued my curiosity.
Dublinevans comment is visible, but as the thread’s previous last comment was May, 2007, it is hardly likely to be noticed.
Thank-you for the links to Realclimate and Nature. I already know the Realclimate site, which is a good source, if a bit technical, but I hadn’t looked at the Nature site before. It seems quite objective.
I challenge Myers to reproduce at Pharyngula my letter to Governor Pawlenty. Incidentally, Pawlenty has not acknowledged receipt of my letter and may not just as neither the Provost nor the Board of Trustees did when I wrote to them about the degenerate behavior of Paul Zachary Myers and his herd of atheist sycophants.
Apparently Myers is free to say and do whatever he wants. If that is still true surely Myers will be happy to reproduce my letter to Pawlenty at Pharyngula and to open it to commentary by his hundreds of adoring fellow atheists.
I say he won’t do it because he knows that both he and his idol Dawkins have lost all credibility with the scientific establishment as they have abandoned any semblance of science to pursue a life dedicated to only one objective – the establishment of Universal Atheism.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like HELL it is!
I love it so!
Woops. He has already done it. I’m wrong again! What else is new?
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/other_people_get_email_about_m.php#comments
179 comments since 2:52 PM today. I am sure there will be many more before bed time in Minnesota.
Now I ask him to reproduce the messages just prior to this one. Myers is gutless TRASH.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
SOCKITTOME
I love it so!
____________________________________________________________________________
224 messages by midnight, every one derogatory.
252 by 7 AM Tuesday.
I love it so!
“Atheist Darwinian mystics unite. You have nothing to lose but your natural selection.”
after Karl Marx
______________________________________________________________________________________
Hi John,
Even though I completely disagreed with DaveScot banning you, as he is now gone, the Darwinbots have returned by the dozens and more deluded then ever. As far as I’m concerned, uncommondescent is not worth reading nor is it worth participating any longer. Everything that has been said by you and by everyone else stays valid, yet despite the validity, the Darwinbots have not acknowledged any of it as expected by your prescribed evolutionary hypothesis. Uncommondescent looks ready to argue with these clowns once again from the beginning thanks to the new moderation policy.
Sincerely,
“Anonymous benefactor”
_________________________________________________________________________________
Springer is not gone. Where did you ever get that idea? And what is the “new moderation policy?” Are they any more tolerant now than in the past?
Uncommon Descent apparently still denies that man is an animal. With that idiotic foundation they are helpless and have nothing to offer themselves.
Springer banished me because he agreed with me and his ego couldn’t deal with it. He also had to banish me to survive at Uncommon Descent. He is still there and now he has Patrick to do the banishing for him. Nothing has changed at Uncommon Descent. That is the way it was “prescribed” to be. Springer is still running the show. He “loves being right” you know. On both sides of the silly debate it is all about ego and power and nothing more. Why anyone would want to continue to kick the rotting Darwinian corpse is beyond me.
There is no place for debate in science, never was and never will be. There is only discovery and the disclosure of what has been discovered. Everything we have discovered favors the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis and an evolution no longer in progress.
“Everything is determined…by forces over which we have no control.”
Albert Einstein
I only wish Einstein had said WAS instead of IS.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/some-thanks-for-professor-olofsson/#comments
Notice that now Barry Arrington is threatening to banish those who are questioning the comments on Springer’s thread. Obviously nothing has really changed at Uncommon Descent. If anything it is getting worse, even more intolerant and defensive than before. When the head of the forum has to threaten the clientele when someone disagrees, that is pretty sad. I think Uncommon Descent has outlived its usefulness which may be why Bill Dembski finally abandoned it.
In any event, chance has never played any role in either ontogeny or phylogeny.
“Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance.”
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 134
It is hard to believe isn’t it ?
Like Hell it is!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/little_axe_oklahoma.php#comments
Myers now sports his DUNGEON right on his opening page. I am so proud to be one of its first inmates along with my friend Martin. Be sure to check it out by clicking on DUNGEON. Myers is a real beauty don’t you think?
Just what does Myers hope to accomplish by bashing religion? Maybe someone here could explain. It makes absolutely no sense to me. The truth is completely independent of what people believe. Louis Pasteur was a devout Catholic. Did that inhibit his science in any way? Of course not. For all we know it may have helped substantially.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Like HELL it is!
I love it so!
_________________________________________________________________________________
I just successfully transmitted this message to Myers via his one way communication system along with some further suggestions as to what he should do with it.
I love it so!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/other_people_get_email_about_m.php#comments
It now has 299 comments.
I call your attention to the comments by “Those Pesky Darwinists,” numbers 285, 287, 281, 293, 294 and 297. I especially appreciate # 281 and # 297 in which I am described as a “real scientist.”
Thank you “Those Pesky Darwinists.”
I am surprised that Myers has allowed these comments to stand. He will probably delete them as soon as he realizes they are there. It must be awful for Myers to have to constantly police his countless threads. What a jerk!
I want to thank “Gumby The Cat” for reprinting, #122, my prediction that Myers and Dawkins will be nothing but insignificant footnotes by next February. I also congratulate Ben Dover (isn’t that delicious?) for #241.
Enjoy!
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
___________________________________________________________________________
Edited November 28, 6:00 AM
It is now at 301 comments and guess who is getting dumped on now. Why its “Those Pesky Darwinists” of course.
I love it so!
I sent this on to Myers also. He is obviously terrified of me. Why else would he allow me to communicate with him? I’ll bet I am the only prisoner in his “Dungeon” who can use his system to tell him what I think of him.
Got that PZ? Write that down!
I love it so!
____________________________________________________
Edited again December 6, 4:00 PM
The thread dealing with my letter to Pawlenty has been deleted. Isn’t that revealing? Myers is TRASH!
I love it so!
I have been getting three to one unfavorable to favorable emails concerning my letter to Governor Pawlenty which Myers reprinted above (with his embellishments in red). I have been called all sorts of hideous names. All because I disapproved of Myers’ corrosive influence and abuses of the right of free speech. The man contributes absolutely nothing of value to any aspect of either evolutionary science or society.
I am still waiting for someone to explain what earthly good it does to ridicule those who have the humility to assume that there was a purpose involved in the creation of the world we see around us.
I don’t expect any responses here or anywhere else.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Not any more it isn’t.
Hi John,
Happy late Thanksgiving, well John I believe it proves a point John. That most of PZ followers are homosexuals why else what they have such fantasies? I think you are more of a threat to PZ than you think.
That which wrestles with us
strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill.
Our antagonist is our helper.
Edmund Burke
Dublin
I KNOW I’m a threat to Myers. Why else would he allow me to communicate to him?
I doubt if most of PeeZee’s followers are homosexuals. No decent homosexual would have anything to do with TRASH like Myers.
I really like that quote from Edmund Burke.
Unfortunately, TRASH like Myers don’t have the stomach to wrestle with this old physiologist. The cowardly moral degenerate prefers to denigrate his adversaries from the safety of his atheist bastion, surrounded by hundreds of foul-mouthed, mostly anonymous, like-minded TRASH.
He even has a special receptacle for those he loathes the most. It is called the DUNGEON and it now adorns his home page.
Got that Myers? You’re TRASH! I really like that word TRASH. I should use it more often. Myers gives it a whole new meaning.
It doesn’t get any better than this.
I love it so!
P.S. This message forwarded to Pharyngula and accepted.
I included a hyperlink last time, perhaps that is why I was “discarded”.
Anyways, I am among those relegated to his dungeon. Admittedly I did “Troll” for a while, but that was after he incited his hoarde to their typical immature antics at my expense.
Last laughers always laugh best, and I am certainly quite jovial now.
antiantitheist, whoever that is.
I make no attempt to prevent anyone from entering this weblog. Only if they refuse to be civil or sensible will they be deleted. It isn’t easy to get yourself banished here and of course the comments always remain.
What exactly do you have to be jovial about or would you rather not say? I don’t see anything very amusing about TRASH like Paul Zachary Myers. He goes right on being the most degenerate sociopath ever to head a weblog . I would like to know of a single significant contribution he has made to our understanding of the great mystery of phylogeny.
There is a very simple reason this blog attracts very few users. It is because whatever they say will remain for as long as the blog exists. This gives pause to those who have nothing of value to contribute. They live in mortal fear that their identity might someday be discovered. Why else would the cowardly TRASH insist on remaining anonymous? I think that henceforth I will capitalize TRASH whenever I use it.
TRASH – “A person or group of people regarded as worthless or contemptible.”
American Heritage Dictionary, definition #4.
I love it so!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/since_kentucky_hasnt_been_subj.php#comments
Number 90 is an elegant put down of everything Myers represents. Hurry before the TRASH deletes it.
It is still there as of 11:30 AM and look at the garbage that it has invoked from Myers’ faithful herd of fellow atheist TRASH.
There is one exception, #101 by TC.
I love it so!
P.S. I sent this on to PZ too.
I love it so!
You’re TRASH Myers, cowardly, sociopathic, congenital, “prescribed” TRASH.
I love it so!
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=493287c761bc84da;act=ST;f=14;t=1272;st=9570
My friend Daniel Smith continues to make fools of the TRASH at “After The Bar Closes.” This has been going on for months. They have already confined him to “The Bathroom Wall,” but for some reason haven’t banished him yet. The way they treat him is disgusting. Why he persists is delightful.
I love it so!
http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/2008/11/sunday_confession_of_a_lapsed.php#comments
I have managed to invade Aardvarchaeology and have not yet been muzzled.
Enjoy!
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/what-aspect-of-life-on-the-earth-requires-supernatural-powers/#comments
I see David Springer and Barry Arrington are now engaging in silly semantic discussions with mostly anonymous blowhards.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Scroll up to November 27, 2008, 7:43 AM where I just brought that comment up to date.
I just sent this on to PZ via his one way communication system.
I love it so!
Fox or one of his cronies has recently been sending comments which indicate they were from me or from other users of this blog. Naturally I have been deleting them. The man is a pig.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/12/i_get_email_23.php#comments
As one can see, I am not the only one who fnds Myers to be a menace to our educational system. What is really scary is the more than three hundred comments this thread generated from his faithful herd just since 11:00 PM last night. Myers is the most dangerous force ever to head a weblog.
I would like to obtain the email address of Bonnie Cox so I can congratulate her on the substance and intent of her letter.
______________________________________________________
485 comments as of 5:00 PM December 7, 2008
_____________________________________________________
565 comments as of 5:00 AM December 8, 2008
____________________________________________________
602 comments as of 5:00 AM December 9, 2008
http://scienceblogs.com/aardvarchaeology/2008/11/sunday_confession_of_a_lapsed.php#comments
This will bring my experience at Aardvarchaeology up to date. As you can see, it shares membership with Pharyngula. I’m surprised they haven’t dropped me. They probably will.
I see Uncommon Descent is still engaged in kicking the rotting corpse of Darwinism. Do you know why they must do this? I will tell you why. It is because they have nothing testable to offer in its stead. That is why.
Do you know why P.Z. Myers, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins keep attacking religion? I will tell you why. It is for exactly the same reason. They HAVE to do it because they are unable to imagine the only conceivable alternative which is a planned evolution. Each faction is strapped in a congenital straight jacket which prevents it from functioning in an objective fashion.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Not any more it isn’t!
It is all very simple. We are all screwed at conception to be what we become. Some of us have been luckier than others.
“Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source…They are creatures who CAN’T HEAR the music of the spheres.”
“Our actions should be based on the ever-present awareness that human beings in their thinking, feeling, and acting ARE NOT FREE but are just as causally bound as the stars in their motion.”
Albert Einstein, my emphasis
Look what I discovered.
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?p=534349#post534349
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
I love it so!
John,
It’s like looking into P.Z’s dreams. John I am sorry no mortal should see that place.
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?p=534588&posted=1#post534588
Please note that now I am now being threatened by the animals at “raving atheists.” I am reporting the matter to the police.
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?p=534771#post534771
It gets better all the time.
John,
I don’t even think you could get a brain wave from those guys. Logic, Sanity and reason seem not to apply. Professor every time you make a valid point they toss insults. I don’t even think they want a valid point, they just want to show you their deviant behavior. However they can’t make one valid point against you which is funny. Also when you told them your background I really don’t think they know what a Professor or biology is, or a academic facility.
I know. Isn’t it wonderful? I’m having a ball.
Reading that “ravingatheists” forum I would say it is even worse than AtBC. I wouldn’t believe such a forum could exist. Is it used as a therapy scribbling-place in some madhouse?
I know it Martin. They don’t even have the brains to ban me. I love masochists like that!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
The best the animals can do is photoshop your likeness, I saw a film over the last few days that matched the Darwinian atheist to a tee. The Nazi movement, I saw a book by
Richard Weikar
” book shows in sober and convincing detail how Darwinist thinkers in Germany had developed an amoral attitude to human society,” says Dr. Richard Evans, Professor of Modern History, University of Cambridge, and author of “The Coming of the Third Reich.” “This provided Hitler and the Nazis with a scientific justification for the policies they pursued once they came to power.”
Weikart explains the revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality. He demonstrates that many leading Darwinian biologists and social thinkers in Germany believed that Darwinism overturned traditional Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment ethics, especially those pertaining to the sacredness of human life. Many of these thinkers supported moral relativism, yet simultaneously exalted evolutionary “fitness” (especially in terms of intelligence and health) as the highest arbiter of morality. Weikart concludes that Darwinism played a key role not only in the rise of eugenics, but also in euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, and racial extermination, all ultimately embraced by the Nazis.
John, Martin does this sound familiar? All the web logs you guys have battled in have been against some of these blind fools a Nazi indoctrinated agenda that Richard Dawkins would prefer to a free thinking people. I look at all those who fought against Hitler and to see their children join them you wondered did he really loose the war? Your thoughts?
1dublinevans
The problem of impact of darwinism on German biological school is a complicated one. The German thinking is more philosophical, going more into depth. The great German biological thinking and pre-war tradition was no way darwinian. Darwinism influenced more common thinking. Various darwinian literature of no scietific value were published by uneducated people. And it was this common, mean, popular darwinism that influenced Hitler.
I am not defending Darwin, but we should be aware of evolution. Darwin’s contribution is that he pointed out on evolution. On the other hand I disagree with natural selection and random mutation as the source of evolution.
So I am afraid he was misused by Nazis for their aims. Do not forget that great evolutionists like proponent of orthogenesis Eimer, or great proponent of German idealistic morphology Wilhelm Troll, or by John mentioned Otto Schindewolf etc,etc..- they all were German, the last two lived in the Third Reich.
—
I have just attacked selfish gene concept and Richard Dawkins himself – regarding the eusociality on the rdawkins.net:
http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=46245
Darwinism isn’t worth dignifying by discussion. It is a total hoax which never had anything to do with evolution. It is both illusion and delusion generated by congenital mentalities that are unable to accept the notion of a purposeful universe. In a very real sense Darwinians can’t help it. Neither apparently can religious fanatics. They were “born that way.” I know that doesn’t sound right yet that is exactly what the studies on separated identical twins have made transparently obvious. We humans are going to have to swallow the bitter pill that we are not free. WE DO NOT HAVE FREE WILL.
Once again I cite Albert Einstein -
“Our actions should be based on the ever-present awareness that human beings in their thinking, feeling and acting ARE NOT FREE but are just as causally bound as the stars in their motion.”
my emphasis
and
“Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics and it springs from the same source…They are creatures who can’t hear the music of the spheres.”
There are degrees of fanaticism. It is difficult to imagine more fanatical atheists than Paul Zachary Myers and Richard Dawkins. They are so consumed with their atheism that they have abandoned any semblance of science to dedicate all their energies to gather as many followers as possble in the idiotic quest to convert the whole world to Universal Atheism. Just click on the big red A that adorns each days edition of “hatespeech” at Pharyngula and you will find Richard Dawkins doing his level best to convert everyone to the “Atheist Cause.” Actually he doesn’t have to “convert” anyone as humans naturally gravitate to others with the same innate tendencies.
“Birds of a feather flock together.”
Cervantes
That is not all they do together. Once they reach sufficient numbers they lash out blindly at all those who don’t share their common views. Nowhere is this more evident than on so-called “forums” like Pharyngula, After the Bar Closes, RichardDawkins.net and Uncommon Descent. They are all isolationist, protectionist, intellectual “groupthinktanks,” useless venues that contribute nothing of substance to our understanding of the great mysteries of ontogeny and phylogeny.
The only way to deal with such ideologues is to ridicule them, to expose them as the congenital failures they have proven to be. One thing is certain. You cannot reason with them.
I agree with you John. Discussion has no meaning because neodarwinism is not science but myth. You cannot beat a myth in any discussion.
Well Martin, you keep doing it, and they are so far removed from reality they don’t even realize it.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Not any longer it isn’t!
This is my latest post at OE, which has been “queued for moderation”:
—-
The discussion on OE is almost dead. Was it really such a good idea to ban professor Davison and me? And to support ignorant Alan Fox instead?
I hope neodarwinian admin is not in charge here anymore.
I think it is time to apologize professor Davison and invite him politely to come back.
Martin
I predict that will never happen. Thanks anyway. Patrick is just a tool of Uncommon Descent.
Hi Martin,
You cannot prove false what isn’t true from the starting point. Imagine if everyone of us simply ignored the Darwinians, they would go insane. I imagine this would apply to some of the ID proponents as well, they would simply go insane if there was nothing to “debate”. As the Joker from “The Dark Night” once said, “I’m a dog chasing cars, what would I do if I ever caught one?”…
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
I believe Darwinians sincerely believe that it is intrinsic in the nature of prebiotic molecules to assemble themselves somehow into reproducing, mutating and evolving entities. It is that conviction that makes it impossible to reason with them. They are incapable of imagining the supernatural. For all I know they may be right. There is no way to prove they are wrong.
What we know for certain is that the fossil record does not support that scenario. The fossil record indicates many separate creations separated by unbrideable gaps for which transitions are inconceivable.
The great genius of Leo Berg was his capacity to ignore what was going on in Western Europe and draw his conclusions about evolution from his own experience and those of other real scientists of the calibre of William Bateson, Reginald C. Punnett, Henry Fairfield Osborn, and others all critical of the Darwinian model. He drew his conclusions from what he saw, not from what he imagined -
“Organisms have developed from tens of thousands of primary forms, i.e, polyphyletically.”
Nomogenesis, page 406
Never did Berg invoke any role for the supernatural nor did any of his scientific contemporaries. In fact Nomogenesis means “evolution determined by law” the subtitle of his book.
If in fact evolution did not involve one or more Creators then I am dead wrong about everything I believe because I am convinced that it is inconceivable that life could be produced even once without supernatural intervention. I will retain that conviction until it can be proven to be wrong.
It is not surprising to me that I am anathema to both the Darwinian and the Fundamentalist camps. The truth lies elsewhere in a world without a personal God or perhaps a world in which there is no God at all anymore. As I posed in the one thread that I managed to introduce at richarddawkins.net forum -
“God or Gods are now dead but must have once existed.”
The best evidence I am right is that thread with the twelve pages of commentary and the tens of thousands of visits it produced is no longer available to be read at richarddawkins.net forum. That speaks volumes as to the bankruptcy and intellectual insecurity of the Darwinian model.
“Davison is the Darwinians’ worst nightmare.”
Terry Trainor
Hi Anonymous Benefactor,
You might be right. They need those discussions. Anyway after 2 years on those forums I came to the same conclusion as John. The discussion is meaningless – you will never persuade a darwinist that he is wrong. He will never teach you something new or interesting.
What’s more – its a pity I didn’t think more about John’s remark that the only use of a neodarwinian book in his household is to drive away his dog.
Reading neodarwinian stuff is such a waste of time. There are so many books that are
more worth of reading. By reading neodarwinian stuff one is wasting time he could spend more useful reading something else.
Hi Vmartin,
I think the only thing worthwhile is exposing the Darwinian’s for their flawed logic (of which you, John and many others have done an excellent job at). The whole structure of modern evolutionary theory is held up by Darwin’s theory. If Darwin’s theory (base structure) collapses all of MET should be reworked to explain past evolution. Without implementing obvious necessary logical substitutions (such as JAD’s hypothesis) then MET will keep wasting space in textbooks and bandwidth until people lose track of it completely in terms of complexity. A build up of junk science will have this effect.
They are IMO going directly against Occam’s Razor. If one does this they will be forced to do one of a few things; completely abandon the theory or simply take much much longer to reach the same conclusion/s that JAD and his predecessors have reached. Science itself is like a selection filter, the more junk you put in the more of less it spits out overtime in terms of predictability and explanatory power. If Darwins theory is wrong, time will eventually kill it as science progresses and as we learn more about biological systems.
For every gap in the theory a gap will be filled, for every subsequent gap filled more gaps will be the result. We can already see this trend in MET, usually this means the beginning of the end. This is where ignorance for the Darwinbots becomes a powerful tool as John has already stated.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Additionally…
I need to add something else (unrelated) to this comment. It seems “After the Bar Closes” members have a deep fascination with who the individual behind the scenes is. An obvious inherent obsession with finding out who certain individuals are, who they work for, when the last time they went to church and perhaps even, what they had for breakfast five days ago. I am seriously starting to think these are incredibly sick-in-the-head individuals who earned degrees in the natural sciences for only one purpose which is to propagate their belief system.
Here is just a recent example:
I am sure there are many here, including myself, who would like to know who “anonymous benefactor” is. Whoever he is, he seems to enjoy being “in charge.” I’m sure not! It is unfortunate that I am so incompetent in managing this weblog or it would run somewhat smoother. I am still waiting to get my essays in one spot, getting the six threads listed again and being able to transfer comments from one site to another. It is very frustrating for me and I apologize to my “hundreds of loyal followers” for any inconvenience it may cause.
Hi John,
1)I will get your essays up in one spot as per your request.
2)Which six threads are you referring to?
3)How is it you are not able to copy and paste comments? I assure you John, that if you cannot perform this function it has absolutely nothing to do with this blog.
John, nobody is complaining about this blog. I don’t see how its not running smoothly. I have heavy hours at work and during the daytime I’m usually sleeping. When I go home I want little or nothing to do with computers. This is why my response time is very slow as I don’t bother checking my e-mail.
Maybe VMartin would be interested in helping to administer this blog?
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Dear “amonymous benefactor”
I am doing the complaining. I have six threads
Welcome to my weblog
Predictions
A Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis
Evolution is finished
Why Banishment?
Global warming
They are no longer on the home page.
As for my essays, I would like to have them on the ESSAYS button on the home page. That way I can eliminate the ESSAYS page on the side bar. I already put “Age of Denial” on the home page button but I am so damn stupid I don’t know how to add the others.
My published papers are fine right where they are.
I don’t know why but I am unable to highlight some of the comments.
Thanks
P.S. What I need is a primer on how to run a weblog.
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?p=535354#post535354
I call your attention to my recent message just posted at “Raving Atheists.” I think it serves to distinguish that weblog from this one in more ways than one. The remarkable thing is the total incapacity of the clientele there to remain even remotely civil. It is even worse than After The Bar Closes and Pharyngula. It is living proof that Darwinism is dead and has been for quite some time.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
Its too bad DaveScot decided to leave this blog. I really enjoy most of his comments regarding Intelligent Design and engineering principles in general. Its too bad it started off on the wrong foot.
The most sound and consistent arguments I have heard regarding design in biology (on blogs/forums) are from the following individuals:
John A. Davison
DaveScot
Gildodgen
Life Engineer
Peter Borger
Daniel Smith
VMartin
Bradford
William A. Dembski
etc…
But out of all of them, engineers and what not, John A. Davison presents something compelling and quite frankly undeniable to me not only from personal experience but from the real-time evidence. If design is real then it could only happen by deterministic pathways rendering the output of that design process determined as well. I believe free-will exists at some level but inevitably it is our biology that plays the primary role and maybe the “mind” plays some minor secondary role in decision making and other quality subsets of our intelligent capacity. Its sad in a way to think about determinism but the data seems to fit the bill better then all competing hypothesis, including some of the other IDeas. I believe Intelligent Design is indirectly arguing for determinism as is John except they have a hard time admitting it.
If it didn’t happen by chance then how else could it have happened? If design by intelligence is a law then how is a law not deterministic?
Darwinism simply doesn’t fit the bill, its explanatory power is climbing downhill the more data is being fed through the microscope.
I believe JAD is right about a few other things. Technology will inevitably devolve as music and art has. It devolves not because of “its” potential, but rather because of a lack of potential. I find that engineering sciences have degraded rapidly due partly to increasing laziness in the field. I say this as a programmer in the field and someone who has deep interest and fascination in engineering principles. The simple truth is that when you rely on something/someone else to do it for you, you learn nothing in the process. One example I can give is software developers creating software that is designed to create other software. In the end, few real engineers will exist and the rest of them pseudo-engineers. Darwinism is another example, Biologists rely on NS & RM to do the explaining for them without much thinking really, rendering them all pseudo-Biologists.
Its really a function of “devolvement” (maybe a new term?).
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Anonymous benefactor,
Thanks for the changes.
DaveScot / David Springer has never been a member of this blog. He is running the show at Uncommon Descent again as he always did in the past. He wouldn’t last long here because of his personality. He is another tyrant like P.Z. Myers, Richard Dawkins and Wesley Elsberry. They share a common feature. It is their way or the highway. Not one of them has ever ventured to comment here. The best they were willing to do was to send their goons like Alan Fox and Woot, whoever that was.
The reason they do not comment here is because they know that no matter what they say, no matter how vile it may be, no matter how dead wrong they may prove to be, their statements will remain as testimony to their rigid, congenital, “prescribed,” immutable personalities.
There is no room for a personal God in science and there is no evidence that God or Gods exist: but to deny the past existence of one or more Gods as the Darwinians always have is, in a word, insane.
We are all victims in a determined sequence which, as near as I am able to see, is in its degenerate final phase. I tried to convey that sentiment in my essay “The Age of Denial.”
“Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source…. They are creatures who can’t hear the music of the spheres.”
Albert Einstein
Never mind Anonymous benefactor. The admin at richarddawkins.net is also a technician. Not all technicians are creationists, some of them are selectionists…
—
Happy New Year.
I waited until I was sure I was going to make it before wishing all my thousands of fans –
HAPPY NEW YEAR
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?p=535432#post535432
Please note tnat Alan Fox has joined the rest of the TRASH at Raving Atheists. Since they refuse to ban me, I have abandoned them after proving beyond any doubt that it is quite impossible to reason with TRASH.
I love it so!
Hi John,
This was one of DaveScot’s latest comments at UD:
“I recommend YOU learn a bit more about what you think you’re championing.
In the theory commonly called Random Mutation Plus Natural Selection the mutations are random with respect to fitness. Fitness enhancing mutations are exceedingly rare because life is already exquisitely well designed. So the vast majority of random mutations are in the range of immediately fatal to slightly deleterious.
Because natural selection doesn’t operate on single mutations but instead must accept or reject all mutations because it operates on the entire organism not microscopic bits of the organism, it must accept the bad and the nearly neutral along with the good.
This leads to things like Haldane’s Dilemma and Sanford’s Genetic Entropy.
Unless very beneficial adaptations are front loaded into the genome in such a way that random mutuation finds them far more frequently than it takes to generate them from scratch then natural selection among species with obligatory sexual reproduction acts as a conservative force keeping the species from wandering too far off the reservation, so to speak, until the inevitable accumulation of nearly neutral (natural selection can’t “see” nearly neutral mutations) slightly deleterious mutations spells eventual extinction.
The fossil record, I might remind you, is a record of abrupt appearance of new species, a long period of no significant change to the new species, followed by an abrupt disappearance. Exactly what a front loaded, pre-programmed phylogenetic progression should look like and nothing like what Darwinian gradualism should look like. Get a clue.”
He seems to be a great candidate to represent your hypothesis if you ask me.
Sincerely,
“anonymous benefactor”
Here was a response from a fellow Darwinist (dubbed “YellowShark”) to DaveScot’s post:
“Natural selection, you see, doesn’t get to select between individual alleles. It can only select whole organisms which contain millions of alleles – the good, the bad, and the ugly.”
This is not a refutation of anything that I’ve said. Stay on topic.
“Fitness enhancing mutations are exceedingly rare because life is already exquisitely well designed. So the vast majority of random mutations are in the range of immediately fatal to slightly deleterious.”
You meant to say “well-adapted”, not “well-designed”, I’m sure. And no. The “majority of mutations” are NEUTRAL. The *average* effect of random mutation, however, is slightly deleterious for the reason you mentioned above.
But I’m sure you knew _exactly_ what you were talking about and you just misspoke.
“Because natural selection doesn’t operate on single mutations but instead must accept or reject all mutations because it operates on the entire organism not microscopic bits of the organism, it must accept the bad and the nearly neutral along with the good.”
Yes. Congratulations. Genetic hitchhiking, linkage disequilibrium, selective sweeps, etc.
Still waiting for this to get to the refutation of the parallel processor analogy. (Hint: You are aware of the whole *population* part of “population genetics”, right?)
“The fossil record, I might remind you, is a record of abrupt appearance of new species, a long period of no significant change to the new species, followed by an abrupt disappearance.”
So says the creationist version of Stephen Jay Gould. You might keep in mind that even die-hard punctuationists don’t make this an absolutist claim. “Gradual” transitions between species exist. It was always an argument about which is the *dominant* pattern. And the jury’s still out.
“Exactly what a front loaded, pre-programmed phylogenetic progression should look like and nothing like what Darwinian gradualism should look like.”
Strange you talked up all that teams of genes and you haven’t even thought about what it means for species. How’s about you do a little reading? You might want to start with:
Futuyma, D. J. 1987. On the role of species in anagenesis. The
American Naturalist 130: 465-473.
Enjoy your clue. I’m getting on the train now.
Thanks Anonymous Benefactor
In future provide the link so I can find it. I don’t care for clues.