Freethought & Rationalism Archive

S2Focus · 09-30-2002, 05:57 PM

If you check out <a href="http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000152" target="_blank">this (very long) discussion thread</a> over at Dembski's ISCID web-site, you'll see that Dembski appears to have met more than his match in one Deanne Taylor (aka "lilith" in the talk.origins USENET newsgroup.)

Dembski started the thread, entitled "Organisms using GAs vs. Organisms being built by GAs", wherein he dismisses the notion that GAs pose any challenges to his ID "research" work.

There are several very knowledgeable people who have risen to the bait and are taking Dembski and his few ID supporters to task. Of Dembski's challengers, Deanne is doing a particularly masterful job of dismantling the pro-ID claims. So far, Dembski and his supporters been unable to respond to Deanne's material with anything more than incoherent babbling.

(Deanne's posts are extremely long and detailed, so if you decide to read through them all, you'll want to fix a strong pot of coffee first -- you will burn through a lot of caffeine digesting her material. Dembski's posts, in contrast, are brief and relatively content-free.)

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: S2Focus ]</p>

Ought Naught · 09-30-2002, 06:23 PM

Ouch! As far as drubbings go, that was an absolute massacre.

pseudobug · 09-30-2002, 06:30 PM

Good grief. Dembski is literally getting drilled.

Funny to see him break out the "molecular fossil" argument on page three and start demanding every intermediate leading to an extant irreducibly complex system.
Dumbski says:

Quote:

Let me spell out what's needed for a detailed Darwinian pathway to explain an IC system. The problem is similar to that of connecting two organisms in the fossil record. Given organisms X and Y, if they are related by common descent via the Darwinian mechanism, there must be a continuous chain of organisms X(0) --> X(1) --> ...--> X(m) = X and Y(0) --> Y(1) --> ...--> Y(n) = Y where X(0) = Y(0) is a common ancestor. In the best circumstance, each such X(i) and Y(j) must be explicitly exhibited and any arrows of causation connecting two organisms must produce small incremental changes that are highly probable on the basis of the Darwinian selection mechanism. The more intermediates that are missing from this picture and the more handwaving and just-so story-telling to describe the arrows of causation, the more problematic the evolutionary explanation.

What a little toad. :lol Just like the cretinists have done with the paleontological evidence for lo these many years. Show them a-->b--> C transitions and they ask for the transition between a and b and b and c. Even worse, he apparently seems ignorant of, or purposefully avoiding, molecular phylogenetic analyses and correlation of rates of change between co-opted portions of pathway components between ancestor and descendant in building irreducibly complex systems.

The sad part is that he is so deluded as to be unable to recognize his own tripe as the real rhetorical hand-waving.

Dembski is such a disingenuos little toad it's a wonder anyone wastes their time arguing with him.
<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: pseudobug ]

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: pseudobug ]</p>

LaFlavor · 09-30-2002, 07:09 PM

let's let my ignorance show. what's a "GA"?

Vanderzyden · 09-30-2002, 07:33 PM

Thanks for the link to this forum, S2. I appreciate it quite a bit.

However, I wouldn't say that Deanne is in any way a "match" for Dembski (or several others that are in disagreement with her there). In fact, she is the one doing much of the babbling. She is very profuse, often way off topic, and has made very few good points for all of that writing.

Incidentally, GA apparently means genetic algorithm.

Vanderzyden

LaFlavor · 09-30-2002, 08:00 PM

do you think he's embarrassed? or does he think that other creationists are unable to tell when they're losing?

Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ · 09-30-2002, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:
<strong>Thanks for the link to this forum, S2. I appreciate it quite a bit.

However, I wouldn't say that Deanne is in any way a "match" for Dembski (or several others that are in disagreement with her there). In fact, she is the one doing much of the babbling. She is very profuse, often way off topic, and has made very few good points for all of that writing.

Incidentally, GA apparently means genetic algorithm.

Vanderzyden</strong>

Didn't see that one coming a mile away.

RufusAtticus · 09-30-2002, 09:12 PM

Quote:

pz's post has been deleted for breaking several board rules. He/she managed to do this with a one sentence quote and a one sentence comment.

What did you do pz?

RufusAtticus · 09-30-2002, 09:16 PM

It's really sad. Deanne Taylor posts these long works with detailed rebutals to Debinski and the best he can do is say "Wait till the weekend I'll get you." Well it's been a couple weekends and he hasn't produced the promised long rebuttal to her points.

I wonder if he ever will....

Vorkosigan · 09-30-2002, 10:01 PM

Wow! Dembski is toast! I can smell the singed flesh all the way from Taiwan....

09-30-2002, 05:57 PM	#1
S2Focus Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: 1162 easy freeway minutes from the new ICR in TX Posts: 896	Dembski's getting his clock cleaned on his own turf... If you check out <a href="http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000152" target="_blank">this (very long) discussion thread</a> over at Dembski's ISCID web-site, you'll see that Dembski appears to have met more than his match in one Deanne Taylor (aka "lilith" in the talk.origins USENET newsgroup.) Dembski started the thread, entitled "Organisms using GAs vs. Organisms being built by GAs", wherein he dismisses the notion that GAs pose any challenges to his ID "research" work. There are several very knowledgeable people who have risen to the bait and are taking Dembski and his few ID supporters to task. Of Dembski's challengers, Deanne is doing a particularly masterful job of dismantling the pro-ID claims. So far, Dembski and his supporters been unable to respond to Deanne's material with anything more than incoherent babbling. (Deanne's posts are extremely long and detailed, so if you decide to read through them all, you'll want to fix a strong pot of coffee first -- you will burn through a lot of caffeine digesting her material. Dembski's posts, in contrast, are brief and relatively content-free.) [ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: S2Focus ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-30-2002, 06:23 PM	#2
Ought Naught Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Winter of My Discontent Posts: 94	Ouch! As far as drubbings go, that was an absolute massacre.

09-30-2002, 07:09 PM	#4
LaFlavor Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Atlanta, GA, USA Posts: 267	let's let my ignorance show. what's a "GA"?

09-30-2002, 07:33 PM	#5
Vanderzyden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: California Posts: 694	Thanks for the link to this forum, S2. I appreciate it quite a bit. However, I wouldn't say that Deanne is in any way a "match" for Dembski (or several others that are in disagreement with her there). In fact, she is the one doing much of the babbling. She is very profuse, often way off topic, and has made very few good points for all of that writing. Incidentally, GA apparently means genetic algorithm. Vanderzyden

09-30-2002, 08:00 PM	#6
LaFlavor Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Atlanta, GA, USA Posts: 267	do you think he's embarrassed? or does he think that other creationists are unable to tell when they're losing?

09-30-2002, 09:16 PM	#9
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	It's really sad. Deanne Taylor posts these long works with detailed rebutals to Debinski and the best he can do is say "Wait till the weekend I'll get you." Well it's been a couple weekends and he hasn't produced the promised long rebuttal to her points. I wonder if he ever will....

09-30-2002, 10:01 PM	#10
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Wow! Dembski is toast! I can smell the singed flesh all the way from Taiwan....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.