Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Camaban · 10-20-2002, 07:25 PM

Yeah, with WinXP, they're finally starting to get it right, stability wise.

nonetheless, my point stands that even though I'm not a programmer, I can see faults in it and suggest improvements.

Which makes V's comment that only engineers can comment on things designed rather.... well, false.

the end user is qualified as well, especially if that end user has the knowledge about the product that comes from constantly fixing it.

Albion · 10-20-2002, 07:46 PM

Quote:

But you are merely a mechanic for the human body; the Creator is the engineer. If you would criticize him, then you need a certain minimum "education", one that could not be accomplished in many, many lifetimes, if ever.

So are you saying that everything's perfect and there are no suboptimal designs? Or are you saying that suboptimal designs just need to be gratefully accepted and not criticised or their effects repaired?

Nat · 10-20-2002, 07:46 PM

Vander's little line:

"Why is it that so many of you are so pompous?"

Just blew three gaskets on my hypocricy meter. Can I sue him for the cost of repair?

Albion · 10-20-2002, 07:47 PM

No, because God made your hypocricy meter and it's perfect. So if gaskets blew, it's because they were meant to blow. And you don't get to repair them, you get to be grateful.

Nickle · 10-20-2002, 07:52 PM

V, scanning through this thread, I see that every point of yours has been addressed. I wouldn't have spent the time to do so; I'm surprised others do. You say you don't agree, but tell us why, or stop posting.

Quote:

To top it all off, you insist that you and MrD have a plan for improving the CV system. Amazingly ludicrous!!! What could possibly be more outrageous? A mere man, who does not have the small power to prevent his own eventual death, dares to suggest that he has a "better design". You are a surgeon. That's good, and your patients will do well to thank you for the reciprocal service that you provide for the community. (You would do well to thank all of those you depend upon.) But you are merely a mechanic for the human body; the Creator is the engineer. If you would criticize him, then you need a certain minimum "education", one that could not be accomplished in many, many lifetimes, if ever. You may call me foolish, but your glib commentary on life-system design is very silly.

You realize that they actually gave examples of better design. The correct response here by you is to state why their examples are inadequate, not a rant.

Oh, and when your done with that, you may want to tackle some of the earlier points in the thread. I'll get the ball rolling..

Quote:

scigirl

If disease is a result of sin, than why is it that we can find animal models of nearly every human disease that exists?

and these:

Quote:

scigirl:
The point is - their very existence, irrespective of their function indicates and supports our theory of evolutionary history! We evolved from fish, and lo and behold, we have fishy-like hearts at one point in our embryological development.

lpetrich:

Why have the heart's interior get split in two when it grows when one could make it start out as two separate sub-hearts? Why create those fishlike aortic arches when they will end up being reorganized and partially deleted?

Amen-Moses · 10-21-2002, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Camaban:
Ok, Windows is designed.

I hope this was a joke!

Amen-Moses

MrDarwin · 10-21-2002, 05:19 AM

These exchanges with Vanderzyden are becoming quite priceless.

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:
MrDarwin's design is more better than the one we acquired through evolution.

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:
More better? We doctors? You are making claims about surgical arts. Aren't you a physician?

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:


I am.

I'm also on-call this weekend or else wouldn't be wasting a beautiful Colorado day responding to creationist drivel.

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:


So, you're not a surgeon, correct? Then why do you spout off as you do?

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:

You are wrong, again.

I'm an endoscopic surgeon, and you are not. I operate almost every day, and you do not.

I know what I am talking about, but you do not.
I'm an expert in human physiology, anatomy, and medicine; you are not.

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:


If you are a surgeon, then why didn't you clarify this when I asked first? Anyway, are you attempting to impress, belittle or ridicule me? Nice try.

Well, it doesn't seem that Rick had to try very hard; Vanderzyden seems to be more than capable of accomplishing that on his own. And then Vanderzyden still has the temerity to explain at length why he is still more qualified than Rick to expound on this topic. It's quite amazing that Vanderzyden was prepared to excoriate Rick for making his comments without being a surgeon, then upon finding he is a surgeon after all, finds it necessary to belittle Rick's medical training and expertise as a surgeon in a self-demeaning attempt to disqualify Rick's comments.

Since several others have already commented on it, I know I'm not the only one to see the delicious irony of Vanderzyden calling Rick "snotty", "snobby", and "pompous". I'll just point out that when it comes to human anatomy and other medical topics, I would suggest that Rick has earned the right to be a wee bit pompous, when he's dealing with somebody like Vanderzyden who hasn't revealed any particular knowledge of the same subject.

Oolon Colluphid · 10-21-2002, 05:27 AM

On a related matter, I wonder why marsupial infants aren�t born straight into the pouch? Instead, they�re born from the usual opening and have to wriggle arduously through their mother�s fur to get there (they are little bright pink wormy things at birth). Any thoughts on why that should be, Vanderzyden?

Oolon

10-21-2002, 05:40 AM

Vanderzyden's performance in this thread is surreal. He must be an atheist sockpuppet trying to discredit xianity.

Camaban · 10-21-2002, 05:47 AM

Quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Camaban:
Ok, Windows is designed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope this was a joke!

Amen-Moses

Well...

you know what I mean.

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

10-20-2002, 07:25 PM	#81
Camaban Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 473	Yeah, with WinXP, they're finally starting to get it right, stability wise. nonetheless, my point stands that even though I'm not a programmer, I can see faults in it and suggest improvements. Which makes V's comment that only engineers can comment on things designed rather.... well, false. the end user is qualified as well, especially if that end user has the knowledge about the product that comes from constantly fixing it.

10-20-2002, 07:46 PM	#83
Nat Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 100	Vander's little line: "Why is it that so many of you are so pompous?" Just blew three gaskets on my hypocricy meter. Can I sue him for the cost of repair?

10-20-2002, 07:47 PM	#84
Albion Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com Posts: 2,829	No, because God made your hypocricy meter and it's perfect. So if gaskets blew, it's because they were meant to blow. And you don't get to repair them, you get to be grateful.

10-21-2002, 05:27 AM	#88
Oolon Colluphid Contributor Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino Posts: 12,591	On a related matter, I wonder why marsupial infants aren�t born straight into the pouch? Instead, they�re born from the usual opening and have to wriggle arduously through their mother�s fur to get there (they are little bright pink wormy things at birth). Any thoughts on why that should be, Vanderzyden? Oolon

10-21-2002, 05:40 AM	#89
DMB Guest Posts: n/a	Vanderzyden's performance in this thread is surreal. He must be an atheist sockpuppet trying to discredit xianity.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.