Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VadeRetro
Who are you, ReMine's dutiful son-in-law?

Nope. Just someone, also from Minnesota, actively curious about the subject...and interested in achieving scientific integrity...which appears lacking from the side claiming a monopoly on science.

Your motivational suspicion of me is humorous, albeit obviously not intentionally so.

I toss off something in half an hour and you seem to go away for five days to write these epic blockbuster compilations of evasion and fantasy.

I note in looking over the history of the threads, that you had about five hours to respond to my posts, and likely took a fair chunk of that to do so...not half an hour. I further note that it has only been TWO DAYS since you so posted, (on 12/08/05, and whereas today is 12/10/05 ) my dilatory response...which was necessitated by my working for a living... is not nearly so egregious. Pardon the delay, however. I hope you weren't inconvienced...

As for compilations of evasion, fantasy and keeping off streets, out of whorehouses, etc....if I were to accept such "encomiums"...I would have to remark that it's apparently mutual.

And as for the purported minimal coverage in the evolutionist web site, your point:

So maybe it's just the Great Evolution Conspiracy ignoring poor ReMine, but they aren't ignoring most of the other anti-Es to nearly the same degree.

is likely true in part, to the extent he poses a more seriously discomoding problem for their theory...hence blithe disregard or pretense is strategy one. And by implication therefore, the other TOE-skeptics or ID proponents they focus on are more vulnerable targets. Not greatly convincing of the persuasiveness or scientific fidelity of TOE advocates, who flee rigorous questioning.

865 posted on 12/10/2005 3:46:24 PM PST by Paul Ross (My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple...It is this, 'We win and they lose.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 863 | View Replies ]


To: Paul Ross
Nope. Just someone, also from Minnesota, actively curious about the subject...and interested in achieving scientific integrity...which appears lacking from the side claiming a monopoly on science.

This is funny coming from a party basically defending the tentative, first-step errors of an era when computers filled warehouses and were basically unavailable for scientific modeling. The errors must be upheld as truth because the kooks don't like the truth.

Pardon the delay, however. I hope you weren't inconvienced...

I promise you I'm not taking very long on my responses to you. Looking at some of my grammar and spelling in previous posts, I can see that this shows. By comparision you're coming off as obsessive.

[ReMine] poses a more seriously discomoding problem for their theory...hence blithe disregard or pretense is strategy one. And by implication therefore, the other TOE-skeptics or ID proponents they focus on are more vulnerable targets.

If Haldane's Dilemma posed the biggest problem, it would draw the most fire. Efforts to pump life into it represent a really obscure bit of anti-evolutionary adventurism. Half of the YECs believe incredibly fast evolution happened after the ark landed. They can't go along with ReMine, if they think about it. (Although it has been my experience that many of them laughably clutch at ridiculously incompatible straws in their religious horror of evolution.)

Many of the remaining anti-Es realize you have to make some kind of sense against the historical record of faunal succesion. You can't do that with Haldane's Dilemma. It predicts a fossil record we don't have.

Thus, until you came along I hadn't talked about Haldane's Dilemma since the banning of medved some 2-3 years ago. You're basically it on FR now. And you have to be a Johnny-One-Note, because ReMine disowns most of the other anti-Es lest he have to defend them.

Clinging to Haldane's Dilemma is of a piece with creationist demonstrations that bumblebee flight is a miracle because it is aerodynamically impossible. A few people will snatch at anything to justify their irrational rejection of evolution, but most people have some sense that bad models mean "garbage in, garbage out."

866 posted on 12/10/2005 5:43:10 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 865 | View Replies ]

To: Paul Ross
I further note that it has only been TWO DAYS since you so posted, (on 12/08/05, and whereas today is 12/10/05 ) my dilatory response...which was necessitated by my working for a living... is not nearly so egregious. Pardon the delay, however. I hope you weren't inconvienced...

I might have expected you'd have a tin ear for my wry hyperbole. I was merely noting your amusing habit of disappearing after a reply, then charging back full of fire and brimstone onto a thread gone dead.

867 posted on 12/10/2005 6:10:59 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 865 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson