Suddenly, lots of people want to debate me. I’m really not that much into the debate business, and I think most of the people who want to battle me don’t need a high-level argument about biology — they need a remedial course in elementary science. Especially since most of the challenges are rather like this one:
Note that the drooling animals are clamoring for P.Z. Myers and Dembski to have a “debate.” What is to debate? Myers is a rabid mad man, completely out of control. His condition is progressive, irreversible, incurable and hopefully terminal.
Besides, Myers is an intellectual coward and won’t “debate” anyone of substance. Neither will Dawkins nor Hitchens. The word “debate” doesn’t even exist in the lexicon of science. It is reserved for lawyers, politicians and evangelists.
Myers immediately retired from the contest at “One Blog A Day” after arrogantly introducing his “Pharyngula” thread with much fanfare, leaving Martin and I with the wonderful opportunity (which we thoroughly exploited) to reduce the Darwinian hoax to a shambles. I sure hope someone preserved it because it is gone now.
I would love to confront him anywhere, with or without his equally deranged cronies – Dawkins and Hitchens. It would be a rout! I can’t even goad them into recognizing my existence. Myers is a cowardly victim, a “prescribed” vendor of hate, the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil. There is nothing that can be done for him or for his colleagues and followers. They are “born that way” losers in the lottery of life. Until they are gone they will remain a menace to Western Civilization. Hopefully that won’t take too much longer.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A, Davison
Sorry, John, I do have standards, and I don’t debate the mentally ill and logically incoherent (really, read what you write. You sneer that “debate” isn’t in the lexicon of science while you challenge me to a debate. Think about it.) (Oh, wait, never mind. The irony of your challenge is so bold that it is clear that you don’t read your own words, and you definitely don’t think.)
And I’m currently scheduled to debate Angus Menuge of the DI this spring. I’ve already agreed to talk with one droning bore of a theologian, why should I also meet with Dembski?
P.S. Any of you drooling animals who wants to comment on this faces a challenge: Davison is banned here, as are his numerous pseudonyms, so you’re going to have to be circumspect lest you invoke his name and your comment ends up awaiting moderation.
Let’s have it, Myers — when are you going to finally settle on a particular philosophy?
(It might come in handy in a debate.)
Well, if you ever do debate JAD, just bring a bucket of monkey shit. JAD can never rise above merely flinging his monkey shit at those who answer him with care and intellect, so the only way to counter him is to have more monkey shit and fling it harder at him.
He can’t even get along with the retarded creationists at Expelled’s blog who initially lauded his derivations from old and worn-out scientists like Goldschmidt.
But as far as that goes, JAD is the most worthy of admiration by the “standards” of Expelled, since he’s been “persecuted” by just about everyone, including the IDiots. I wonder why Ben Stein doesn’t care about his plight, since of course being dissed is automatic grounds for sympathy in his book (he’s just selective in application).
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
“I can’t even goad them into recognizing my existence.”
Standing on a soapbox at Speaker’s Corner bellowing inanities does not get your existence noticed by people of discerning character.
The challenge is so bad as to be almost funny, particularly the bit about rabidity. PZ was exhibiting an almost uncanny calm in his previous ID debate. And to describe the readers of this blog as his ‘followers’ – that’s just missing the point of science in a nutshell.
If this guy didn’t duck the debate if PZ rose to the risible challenge, I’d be frankly amazed.
Do seventh grade taunts work on mature adults? The whole screed is a mess. I guess it makes sense in a way, i.e., they believe in fairies because they can’t comprehend the complexity (and beauty) of nature, but the same lack of intellectual rigor makes their arguments extremely weak. I used to think, “Good thing these people are so stupid”, but I realize that their taking the position they do proves them ignorant for sure. Fighting superior evidence and logic makes them look foolish.
Stay out of the monkey shit business, that’s my advice.
Heh. “Loser in the lottery of life.” Good one.
OT, but wouldn’t hurt to have some humor here:
New evidence for the atheist faith (aka, the religionists don’t get all the miracles).
Glen D
His challenge raises many questions:
Why does he need a debate if he has already “reduce[d] the Darwinian hoax to a shambles”?
How does one become a “prescribed” vendor of hate?
Who does the prescribing? If it goes against their religious principals, can they refuse to fill the prescription?
If James Joyce had written a Mills and Boon novel, the result would have had greater clarity and more substance than Davison’s rant.
What exactly does he mean by “The word ‘debate’ doesn’t even exist in the lexicon of science”? Is he saying that debate shouldn’t be part of science, or that debate isn’t part of science as currently practised?
I wish Dawkins and Hitchens were my cronies.
“Why won’t you friggin’ install?!”
-Rey Fox, 2/4/08
So if “life’s a lottery”, he has ruled out his own arguments stating “that chance could never have had anything to do with the origin or the susequent[sic] history of either ontogeny or phylogeny.”
So if “life’s a lottery”, he has ruled out his own arguments stating “that chance could never have had anything to do with the origin or the susequent[sic] history of either ontogeny or phylogeny.”
As a drooling animal, I am a huge fan of PZ’s work in publicizing skeptical thought and introducing laymen to the process of studying biology.
However, he might want to refrain from debates. He wiped the floor with the last fool he debated, but in general debates are a useless tactic because the process rewards smoothtalking demogogues more than it does a rational discussion of the facts.
The Bad Astronomer had his ass handed to him by Joe Rogan on PEnn Jillette’s radio show last year in a debate on the veracity of the Appllo moon landings (Rogan is on the “we never went to the moon” side). Phil lost the debate, not because Rogan was right (he isn’t), nor because Rogan understood his material (he doesn’t). Penn poorly moderated the discussion, and he allowed Rogan to talk over Phil, so that Phil’s corrections of Rogan’s errors were drowned out by a nonstop stream of nonsense. Penn is a staunch anti-woo opponent, so I was very disappointed that he allowed that to happen just because he and Rogan are friends.
To have a useful debate that might influence the thinking of the audience, you must have a fair moderator who gives each side equal time to speak. In addition, a debater has to have bullet points to get his POV across, and not get lost in nuance.
A debater also has to be able to dumb down his material to the level of his audience without losing accuracy. A debate in front of a church audience is going to be much more general and use simpler vocabulary than one would use at a university debate.
Anyway, PZ, you’re an outstanding voice for science and for freedom from theism, so please keep on keepin’ on.
…the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil…
(Hurries off to edit email signature…)
Hey, linguification!
The problem with debating these people is that you cannot have a conversation if you cannot agree on something basic(like what does the word ignorant mean). Without some common framework all you are doing is talking at each other. Creationists do not start from an understanding of words like theory and science so there can be no real discussion. Perhaps there is some opportunity to reach a listener but in the end what have we really gained other than high blood pressure?
“”Leaving Martin and I” ! Before he does any (more) debating, this ignoramus needs to take (and pass) a course in remedial English.
What kind of fucking delusional shithead quotes himself incessantly?
For someone who purportedly believes in God, he sure as hell doesn’t seem to have any problem with idolising himself.
Someone should introduce JAD to yoga. With a little work he’ll become flexible enough to suck his own dick and won’t need Martin anymore.
“Myers is a cowardly victim, a “prescribed” vendor of hate, the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil.”
If PZ is evil then I would be proud to call myself evil as well.
“[debate]…is reserved for lawyers, politicians and evangelists”
What a highly respected group that is :-)
Debate for the majority of these people isn’t the same thing as debate and discourse in science. Science has the ultimate aim of getting to the truth. Ok, there have been some big disagreements and egos in science but for the group above the sole goal for any ‘debate’ is to convince their audience. Truth is an innocent bystander.
Don’t do it PZ – you’ll just encourage another thousand ‘why dawkins et al are wrong’ books :-)
PZ said:
“I think most of the people who want to battle me don’t need a high-level argument about biology — they need a remedial course in elementary science.”
Given the comments some made about you calling Simmons ignorant I think that they may need far more than remedial science. Remedial English might be a better bet.
“Followers” – amusing. Just today my therapist wanted to focus on my (really rather unhealthy) despect for authority and tried to help me find some authority figures that were actually deserving of admiration and respect.
I can’t say I want to follow PZed, but I should consider myself a bit more of a succes if I could follow his example(s).
(I did actually consider starting a blog with a bit of moron baiting since I spent a few minutes looking at the ‘lectures’ and events for one the local ‘philosophical societies’ — but I’ll be damned (heh) before I pay 7 quid a pop to see clairvoyants, astrologers and gurus perform.)
“Hopefully terminal”? Yeah, that’s a loving Christian attitude now, isn’t it? The guy must be a fundamentalist!
Well, sure, he sounds crazy here, but I always enjoyed John Davidson on That’s Incredible! when I was a kid.
PZ Myers a madman? Terminal? Incurable?
These silly creationists and IDists are sounding more and more like Timecube’s Gene Ray than ever before. “You are educated stupid and evil!”
Yikes.
Gotta love the eliminationist rhetoric. But if you are the absolute zenith (or would that be nadir) of evil, what do you call people who long for their opponents to be wiped out?
Maybe so, but he was no match for Peter Marshall on Hollywood Squares. Paul Lynde to block!
(Did I just reveal my advanced age?)
Speaking of Peter Marshall, I just found this. He wants to “restore America to its Bible-based foundations.” Speaking of a need for remedial education . . . .
“the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil”
Wow, PZ, I’m liking you more with each passing day. I’ll bet Beelzebub’s about to fire his agent.
Hahaha… Is it time to point and laugh at John A. Davison?
Seriously, the guy’s a freakin’ under-medicated head-case, and I hope he finds the help he desperately needs. Until then, he should be mocked and mocked well.
Nonetheless, I wouldn’t waste your time with the guy, PZ. There’s no way you could ever hope to open his eyes to his academic and intellectual dishonesty. You can shine a light on his madness, and you can show it to whatever crowd that gathers, but I really don’t think it would do him any good, and it may actually do considerable harm to the fragile fellow.
It’s always amazing how easily unhinged these creationists become. I wonder what leads people to so effortlessly tumble ass over tea kettle into madness, ignorance and arrogance?
Aside from that, grow the fuck up Mr. Davison. You’re acting like a petulant, spoiled child. The only thing you deserve from anyone is a swift swat on your ass and a lecture on what is expected of normal adult human beings.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought so. Penn’s one of the Good Guys, but on the radio show sometimes he let his enthusiasm for crazy, off-the-wall opinions get the better of his common sense.
I miss the show, though. It occurs to me that if it were still on, yesterday would not only have been Super Tuesday and Fat Tuesday, but also Monkey Tuesday. Super Fat Monkey Tuesday? The mind boggles.
“Remain a menance to Western Civilization” Are these jokers
delirious? This just cries out for debate, and one with no
holds barred! Do it PZ, and rip into them with all the
force of reason at hand, and even blatant sarcasm to
counter their phony stance at rationality. Damn, they
offered the challenge, so why not accept and prove who is
the menance to Western Civilization! This just boils my
freaking blood and I would love to debate the deranged scum
and let loose with all my not-pent-up emotions and hatred
and use the most blatant and direct statements to which I
have expressed on this site. A challenge from the religious
slime should not be ignored and given with the most
vitriolic outporing possible. We are the menance? The vile,
freaking scum1
Hilarious:
“Oh, if only people knew of my greatness, they’d all see how the evolution conspiracy works, fo shah!”
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
What the hell are nylon-eating bacteria and antibiotic-resistant strains, then? Is God applying hardware upgrades?
I haven’t listened to a lot of these debates, but I did listen to this one. My immediate reaction is that there’s no value to these things, except in court. Why? Because if I knew nothing about biology and were not inclined to confidence in the scientific method, I wouldn’t even be sure that PZ won the debate, let alone so outclassed the Creationist as to suggest the latter could have fared equally well by staying home.
These faith-based bastards DO use ignorance as evidence and will make up facts, but if a person doesn’t know what is true or not, there’s no way to be sure it’s the FBB whose lying rather than the scientist.
No matter who wins a debate on the specifics, only the choirs will recall the tunes.
You guys (Americans) have to crush them in the courts so that your children get educated.
By the way, PZ has mentioned his lack of of tact in the debate…
Hell, I’d have popped a vessel trying to show the level of restraint he demonstrated against the lying, hypocritical coward on the other mike…
Dembski: UHHH UHHH EHH UGH EM uh…. UHHHH well.. EHHH…
So, they see refusing to have a battle of wits with an unarmed moron as a bad thing? Huh, theres yet ANOTHER disagreement we can chalk up.
Saw this link today. “Creationist Tips to Doing Battle with Evil Atheists”
http://www.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/christians-tips-to-doing-battle-with-evil-atheists?hl=en
Enjoy!
I see other people enjoyed this too:
In other words: “No matter how much I act like an idiot, they still treat me like an idiot!”
“Remain a menance to Western Civilization” Are these jokers
delirious? This just cries out for debate, and one with no
holds barred! Do it PZ, and rip into them with all the
force of reason at hand, and even blatant sarcasm to
counter their phony stance at rationality. Damn, they
offered the challenge, so why not accept and prove who is
the menance to Western Civilization! This just boils my
freaking blood and I would love to debate the deranged scum
and let loose with all my not-pent-up emotions and hatred
and use the most blatant and direct statements to which I
have expressed on this site. A challenge from the religious
slime should not be ignored and given with the most
vitriolic outporing possible. We are the menance? The vile,
freaking scum1
I wish you WOULD accept his offer of a debate, just so I could hear you tear him apart.
The difference between debating someone like Simmons and JAD is that Simmons is just a dishonest, arrogant, willfully ignorant, blowhard and JAD is a dishonest, arrogant, need-to-be mental patient, blowhard. I don’t think Simmons is mentally ill, but there is no doubt that JAD is.
JAD? Didn’t he have some tragic breakdown?
Time to revisit JAD Orders a Pizza
How I love it so!
All hail the dread Lord PZ! He marches forth with his mighty Scepter of Plumbing in one hand and a stretchy chicken in the other. Dare to do battle with him and you may be smitten or smotten….er…smacked upside the head with either scepter or fowl. Be afraid. And his cuttlefish will attack your toes too.
Well this has been a fun diversion to moving numbers from one column to another.
Don’t worry, PZ. As the World’s Greatest Creationist, I don’t see the need to debate your or anyone or publish anything. Everyone knows in their heart that I’m right, and evolution is so stupid and unscientific anyway, why should I waste my time with debates and research?
This part of the link amazes me:
Don’t feel like you have to win all of the battles. You are not going to. In fact, you may not win any of them. Be satisfied with being able to clearly and logically express what you believe and why.[…]We are challenged to give an answer, not to win a fight.
So, this guy’s admitting up front that arguments for Christianity are so poor that they’re not likely to convince anyone. Really powerful explanatory framework for the universe you have, there.
I’m shocked, just shocked, to hear that PZ is evil. Is evil catching? Maybe I should avoid this blog just in case.
Part of me wants to start collecting creationist exaggerations and hyperboles, maybe with the goal of figuring out how to throw them back in their faces in the future, but, you know, it would be such a huge job….
I’m shocked, just shocked, to hear that PZ is evil. Is evil catching? Maybe I should avoid this blog just in case.
But evil is carried via æther not tubes.
*cough cough joke cough cough
That self-proclaimed (is there another sort at UD?) intellectual giant, DaveScot, is suddenly claiming that JAD is a biologist of the highest caliber whose views iconoclastic. It’s bizarre then that DS felt it necessary to ban JAD from posting on uncommonly dense.
holbach asks:
Yes, I think so. They’re crazy enough that you can tear them apart in a debate and they’ll leave thinking they’ve won by merely asserting their position.
It reminds me of the taunts Vox Day has been throwing around trying to promote his new book:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/01/just-one-more-of-vox-days-lies-andor.html
Don’t you love how these smug, cleverer-than-thou “anti-Darwinists” jump immediately to wishing death upon the people they disagree with? Quote: “His condition is progressive, irreversible, incurable and hopefully terminal.” I mean, gosh, it’s a good thing they don’t suffer from the kind of deviance that leads to becoming “a cowardly victim, a “prescribed” vendor of hate (whatever that means), the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil.”
Remind me again how you avoid tearing your hair out when you read this garbage?
“Myers is a rabid mad man, completely out of control”
YOU’RE A LOOSE CANNON, YOU’RE OFF THE CASE!
Science has a foundation of millions of pages of data and interpretation compiled over centuries by hundreds of thousands of very smart people. To try to hash it out in an hour in a format preferred by professional liars is stupid in the extreme. Anyone clamoring to do such should be instantly suspected of being a fool or a charlatan or both.
You won’t debate John Davison but you’ll endorse an empty-headed blowhard like Henry Rollins? Don’t kid yourself, PZ. The only standard you have is to never engage with anyone who is smarter than you.
OT but more important than the buffoons discussed above. A great geneticist passed away two days ago. Josh Lederberg, 1958 Nobel, is no longer with us. I got to know him in 2003 as I was writing the biography of his pal Cavalli-Sforza. Nice guy. He would have pulverized the Disco jerks in a nanosecond, had he cared to do so.
Norman @ # 49 Just finished the Vox Day insanities you
linked. Yes, I believe the deranged insanities of this
slime, but it boils my blood as hot as the flames at the
heading. Thanks again for the link: it is worth saving!
“the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil”
Good to know that you can be morally and ethically evil.
JAD believes in front-loading if I recall correctly. I guess since God knew about nylon long before we invented it, He put the “information” required for eating it in the Primordial Genome.
Hallelujah! *eyeroll*
I’ve been reading Richard Evans’ “The Third Reich in Power” lately. John Davison’s rhetoric, as exhibited here, is very close in tone and content to Nazi rhetoric. Is there a connexion?
DAC @ #53 Moe of The Three Stooges said it best as it
applies to you. “Every time you think you weaken the nation”.
PZ,
Your JAD sounds a little bit like this guy I recall from years ago. Basically, he started a gubernatorial campaign and demanded to debate the incumbent governor. When his demand was ignored, he went on a hunger strike on the grounds of the state capitol building.
Maybe JAD could do the same outside UMM.
In fact, no. He believes God is dead — literally: that God once existed but no longer does. He also believes that evolution happened, past tense, and has stopped. As mentioned above, the IDeologues aren’t any nicer to him than anyone else other than VMartin.
0.9 Tc.
That’s one d too much and one A too little.
Nobody with 0.9 Tc is a menace to anything.
No. PZ alone is the menace. Menaces are like Highlanders — there can be only one.
No. You’re simply being a “prescribed” idiot for not having guessed that John “A” Davison is only talking about speciation. He believes that species have some kind of mystical reality (nobody, including himself, knows which species concept he has in mind), and that Homo sapiens was the last species to ever arise. Never mind Culex molestans, the London Underground mosquito, to cite just the most glaring example…
God is (see above) dead, so he can’t apply any hardware upgrades, you “born that way” loser.
He has been having a tragic breakdown for years.
——————–
IMHO the whole page is concern-trolling. It’s great fun to read.
In fact, no. He believes God is dead — literally: that God once existed but no longer does. He also believes that evolution happened, past tense, and has stopped. As mentioned above, the IDeologues aren’t any nicer to him than anyone else other than VMartin.
0.9 Tc.
That’s one d too much and one A too little.
Nobody with 0.9 Tc is a menace to anything.
No. PZ alone is the menace. Menaces are like Highlanders — there can be only one.
No. You’re simply being a “prescribed” idiot for not having guessed that John “A” Davison is only talking about speciation. He believes that species have some kind of mystical reality (nobody, including himself, knows which species concept he has in mind), and that Homo sapiens was the last species to ever arise. Never mind Culex molestans, the London Underground mosquito, to cite just the most glaring example…
God is (see above) dead, so he can’t apply any hardware upgrades, you “born that way” loser.
He has been having a tragic breakdown for years.
——————–
IMHO the whole page is concern-trolling. It’s great fun to read.
Reading JAD’s delusional screeds always makes me feel like I’m being accosted by a beared man with a trash bag on his head, wearing one tennis shoe and carrying a ball of rubberbands. You can practically feel the spittle through the monitor.
DAC – Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha [breathe] hahahahahahahaha.
That was a good joke. No, really, what else have you got?
He called you rabid, evil, AND a menace to Western Civilization? Yikes. Someone’s acute bitterness is showing. I can just imagine him typing that up while muttering and screeching in a high pitched tone.
“Grr.. Hate him so much. Hate Myers so much. Eeeeeeeeeee. Hate him so so so much EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Hate him forever and ever!”
Oh, and thanks for the dope-slap, Rev. I swear, I sat staring at it going back and forth wondering if it was real or parody, and finally landed on the wrong side. I think I’m getting too cynical of the general intelligence of humanity. Quite relieved in this instance, though.
PZ, you just lost a battle. J. D. goaded you into recognizing his existence. You should have just ignored his foolishness.
I have nothing to say about “he who must not be named”. But since it is impossible to comment at Uncomment Descent, where they old argument from incredulity has been dragged out and recycled in relation to the evolution of metamorphosis, I’ve offered a reply on my own blog. Since I do hope that those who may have a better grounding in biology than myself will suggest improvements, corrections, and other links – and that those who are still allowed to comment at Uncommon Dishonesty will do so while they still can.
http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2008/02/argument-from-incredulity.html
By the way, PZ, I really liked your main point in this post. If the overwhelming majority of biologists and scientists in other relevant fields see the evidence for evolution as decisive and clear, then clearly someone who is unpersuaded doesn’t need an alternative to evolution, they need remedial biology
DAC, I double-dog-dare you to call Henry Rollins an “empty-headed blowhard” in person.
I wasn’t familiar with this Davison guy before now, but from reading just that small bit of diatribe, he sounds like he really needs immediate attention from mental health professionals. Anyone who expresses hope for another person’s death based on ideological differences has got serious issues. PZ would be smart not to engage in any dialog with him.
“Myers is a cowardly victim, a “prescribed” vendor of hate, the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil.”
Crikey, I’m not sitting anywhere near you at the next MnCSE board meeting.
Yes, Myers, you’re immoral.
Now, all those priests who corn-holed choirboys? They’re just fine. All those good god fearin’ Christians who murder people because they happen to have had or might perform an abortion. They’re good moral people. George W. Bush murdering people for oil? He’s just fine too. All those preachers who bilk their stupid ass sheep out of billions of dollars tax free? They’re the epitome of morals.
Somebody stop the world. I want to get off.
I would not recommend debates- mostly a waste of time. However, educating the public about science is a necessity. Give public seminars on current research or current topics in science. I gave such a talk yesterday and it had the local religious loons up in arms. Even they recognized the power of the arguments AND it was well received by the non-delusional members of the audience. P. Z. (and others who post here) give seminars!
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
Huh? I thought that there have been current demonstrations of evolutionary mechanisms such as random mutation.
Come on guys, will someone here at least admit that Rollins is a few degrees short of a thermometer? Or do you all feel so insecure about your views that you’ll side with anyone who supports them? You remind me of bunch of evangelicals I know who embraced the “Passion of the Christ” a few years back even though the theology expressed in the film was far from orthodox. Anything to make another convert.
Has JAD put up any one post blogs lately? Where he’s the only commentor.
Thanks. Just the other day, I was wondering to myself, “Now who do I and the majority of posters on Pharyngula remind some halfwit JAD supporter of?”
I really appreciate you clearing that one up for all of us. I really do.
Now, leave us be. I’m sure Johnny’s got some spittle on his chin that you’ll be pleased to wipe up. And please, for nogod’s sake, don’t forget to give him his pills. You know how tenuous his grip on reality is.
By the way, did I mention you’re a fucking retard?
You can’t debate a jackass. He will just lay his ears back and bray. It is the Jackass way, don’t make it yours.
Hey DAC
Could you at least keep your trolling on one thread?
Please! Cornholing is a perfectly respectable midwestern game and has no lascivious connotations. After years of practice I have trained myself to say it with a straight face, and E in Md is not helping!
to James McGrath, #68 :
DaveScot does NOT believe that the genome has anything to do with phenotypes ?!?!
It has been known for something like 20 years that cell:cell interactions and the interplay between regulatory genes is what generates body plans !
There are no genes for the left lower molar or the left pinky nail, for instance – those structures are generated by the interactions of many different genes. Changing when, where, how much, and for how long certain genes are expressed can make quite a bit of difference in the final body form.
But the fact that the structures are not directly encoded by the genome is no excuse to start gibbering about magical patterns being imposed from ‘outside’.
The ‘carp nuclei into goldfish egg’ paper he cited does not say what he desperately wants it to – the paper is a classic demonstration of maternal effect genes, AFAICT.
Proteins needed for early zygotic patterning (determining which end is the head, etc) are expressed and remain in the cytoplasm. When the nuclei was removed, the goldfish proteins were still there. There is no need to whine ‘this PROVES DNA has nothing to do with patterning !!!’, since the factors doing the initial patterning arose from the goldfish genome in the first place !
The Atlas of Fly Development :
http://www.sdbonline.org/fly/atlas/00atlas.htm
This shows where the adult structures come from.
His ‘ideas’ about metamorphosis are completely whack – since the cells that will form the adult structures are already present (some have been present since embryogenesis), there is no need for the pupa to completely dissolve and reform !
What happens is the larval tissues are degraded to fuel growth of the imaginal discs and rings which form the adult tissues.
The main difference between the insect groups is timing – WHEN the adult structures form.
For ametabolous insects, adult structures are present in the larvae, and grow along with the rest of the body.
For hemimetabolous insects (like cicadas, grasshoppers, and dragonflies), the adult structures are present, but small. They grow slowly along with the rest of the systems.
For homometabolous insects (like flies, butterflies, and moths), the adult structures are present in the embryos, but remain small clumps of cells until pupation occurs.
“Anything to make another convert.”
That’s funny. In the other thread you berate us for showing the Rollins video because you think we’re not going to win any hearts and minds to our side with his polemic. Now you seem to think we can “make another convert” with him on our side. Your secret man-crush on Henry Rollins is making you confused, DAC.
Two things DAC, the HR clip was more for entertainment then trying to get a “celebrity” endorsement. As it stands, I think most of the people here had problems with now HR presented Darwin. But that is merely a trifle.
Second, do you have a type of mental condition where that, once you get an idea stuck in your head, that is all you can converse about.
I will give you some advise. Most of the people here are going to ignore you. The handful that responds to your street corner ranting are mocking you.
Say, what to you think of JAD?
Yak, Henry Rollins has, unfortunately, been encouraged to think that he actually isn’t a vacuous poseur. Have you actually listened to him grunt out one of his stilted slice of life stories? Sheesh! He hasn’t been worth paying attention to since well before he fucked up Black Flag.
Christ Davis, there is already a HR thread. Please direct your comments there. You are just showing you do not understand the topic here. Just leave that to DAC.
Since winning a debate has almost nothing to do with who is right, why would you bother? That’s why all fundie schools have classes on debating.
I took a class called “evolution in geology” a while back. We had a debate, where I was assigned the creationist side. I thought I did a pretty good job. After the debate, I asked the TA for permission to demolish all of the BS arguments I had used.
If they have something to say, let them publish in peer reviewed journals.
Maybe this has been mentioned before and I missed it, but I love this part of his letter;
“Besides, Myers is an intellectual coward and won’t “debate” anyone of substance. Neither will Dawkins nor Hitchens. The word “debate” doesn’t even exist in the lexicon of science. It is reserved for lawyers, politicians and evangelists.”
I think lawyers, politicians and evangelists are very comparable.
I’m no fan of,JAD, however, PZ sinks to a low level in indicting the fool -by name- all over this post, then brag about the fact that -JAD- is banned, and obviously won’t be allowed to respond.
NOt that I want to read the response. But PZ sinks lower by engaging in such an action of passive/aggressive response.
Better simply to never mention the guy.
You just don’t see the irony in expecting everyone to agree with your criticisms of PZ and then styling yourself “Nobody”, do you?
Hey Jeremy,
I’ma lawyer and I take exception to being put into the same category as evangelists and politicians. We have much better jokes made about us than them! Mind you I hate most lawyers I know so maybe its an apt categorisation after all.
I had a dog called JAD once. Tiny chihuahua fox terrrier cross. Loved that dog. He died and I was sad.
Funny how a deluded fucktard can actually dredge up some bittersweet memories.
Once more, nobody said nothing.
Come on nobody, what can PZ do that would be good in your sight.
Just so you know, I think you are so low, you can walk under the underbelly of a worm with out ducking. I do not think you can get much lower. But then, you are nobody. You words are treated as such.
Got to appreciate part of his logic. Since PZ won’t debate him it must mean his position is right. So using that reasoning the Pope must be wrong because I challenged him to a debate and he won’t acknowledge my existence either. The sword cuts both ways.
dn’t dbt th mntlly ll nd lgclly nchrnt
r nyn tht y’r frd cn bt y.
‘v bn tryng t ngg y fr yrs, bt y kp rnnng wy.
thnk ‘v hld my wn prtty wll vr th yrs f r cqntnc frm tlk.rgns t Pnd’s Thmb t hr.
Yr rspns? BNND
“Wrd nt-vltnst wth dlsns f ntllgnc. Cmmnly pppd p n rspns t ny scnc pst t clm tht t shwd vltn ws wrng. pt p wth hm fr mny yrs; whn h rjctd my rqst t mk nly cnstrctv cmmnts n prtclr thrd, h dfd m nd pstd th sm nslt rptdly, nd thn nsstd t ws hs prvlg, wnt n mrphng spr, nd thrtnd t spm th st vry tm my bck ws trnd. Cmplt ss.”
“t th lst grppl wth th; frm hll’s hrt stb t th; fr ht’s sk spt my lst brth t th.”-
Mby Dck by Hrmn Mlvll
[Among the reasons for banning this twit was his cowardly propensity for hiding his identity under multiple pseudonyms, a pattern that clearly has not changed. Still banned. pzm]
Aaaargh! Apologies, but why oh why does he ALWAYS use that FUCKING quote in his signature!? It’s not even a very snappy or good one! Aaaargh! And what does it even MEAN!? Aaaargh!
Because the Unibomber used up all of the good quotes.
You’re right, of course, Janine. I didn’t post there because I didn’t read the Rollins post. I understand the subject of this thread, but other people have the discussion well in hand. I was feeling snarky when I replied. After a snack my head cleared.
Peace
Hey David M,
what do you mean by ‘people over about 0.8 Tc’? The Wikipedia disambiguation page didn’t help me. Got a link?
Should established scientists and professors debate the mentally retarded? I think no. I don’t debate the crazy lady in the city centre who walks the street trying to sell people crumpled up tinfoil. Get that guy a good doctor and be done with him.
#96 John Scanlon,
I shan’t direct you to the location, but I’m sure somebody will. Let’s just say that 0.8 Tc is an appellation most often applied to those who not only believe Klingons are real, but that they’re here to protect us from the Lizard Queen of England and her nefarious plans to make aspirin a prescription drug and dimorphine over-the-counter.
Think “If it wasn’t for Adolf Hitler the Jews would never have gotten off their fat asses and founded Israel. Therefor he deserves a place of honor as a Friend of Israel.” That is a 0.8 Tc mind
I confess. I was one of the deluded followers who poked sticks at Martin and JAD at One Blog A Day. Martin, although so wrong on many points was actually not insane. JAD was like debating a scratched record. Anything that might challenge his views was dismissed with cutting comebacks such as “prescribed fools” and “In my Manifesto..” etc.
John is a very strange person.
Has anybody suggested setting Simmons on Dembski? I mean, Dembski DID just say that Simmons wasn’t anybody of substance. Why not let them devour each other for a while?
Hey Davidson: “A past dipshit is unmistakable, a present fucktard is among us.” I’ll put a vendor of hate so far up your divine asshole that irreducible shit will be spewing from your glottis.
Oh, crap. Mistype. I meant Simmons on JAD. Sorry, sorry…
Klingons aren’t real?
Boy did I waste a bunch of time learning their language.
Is that drool dripping from the corner of my mouth? Hmmm.
Who wants to debate someone who doesn’t know the difference between “…leaving Martin and me…” and “…leaving Martin and I…”? Oh, wait. He’s a loony. Nevermind.
For some reason though, I think nutters with bad grammar are worse than plain nutters. The people who get this one wrong tend to do so while being pretentious without knowing how to use grammar. It goes so well with quoting yourself in your own signature. What is this man’s problem? Low self-esteem? Is he that bad at his job? (Sorry, that I/me thing is a pet peeve. But it does fit in with the general impression of JAD.)
Now I know how Joan of Arc felt
As the flames rose to her Roman nose
And her walkman started to melt
If you’re going to quote Morrissey…
I have to say my first reaction when reading this malicious tripe was a “Yes, that sort of sums up PZ, and that is exactly why he has such a strong readership!”
If PZ were not progressive (in the sense of continuously advancing in knowledge and learning) in his thinking, or if he were to flip-flop (reverse) his positions, he would not be interesting to read.
As to the “incurable” and “terminal” claims, that applies to us all, if you use this cynics clear-headed definition:
“Life is a sexually transmitted disease with 100% mortality.”
Man, PZ, what did you have to do to score cronies like Dawkins and Hitchens? I mean, not that I’m bringing your awesomeness into question here, I don’t doubt for a moment that both of them get you coffee and run your errands. You think Dennett’s available to TA my intro courses?
Biting, Janine. Very biting. Rest assured I am cut to the quick.
In response to your query, all PZ has to do is show a modicum of humility. Something along the lines of, “You know, if I’m gonna call the twit Davison out, maybe I should give him some response time.”
But he won’t. And his baying constituency will in all likelihood continue with their time-honored tradition of name-calling and straw-man constructions in place of actual, rational argument.
Looks like NOBODY=JAD
Too funny.
nobody, you know not what you speak of. If PZ were to allow JAD to comment here, the end result is all too predictable. there would be long tract of verbal vomit splashed upon our computer screens. Strangely enough, about seventy five percent of the comments will be from JAD and VMartin.
Now how can anybody know this? Because it always happens. So the question is this; why let such unpleasantness happen on this site when it is easy enough to find JAD and read what he has to say? Or is this too difficult of a task for a nobody such as you.
Also, just so you know, I am through commenting with you. You have revealed your intentions. That is all I need. You are a true nobody. Buh-bye!
I’m more in line with the “don’t bother” crowd. An emotional argument will get nowhere quickly, and this is what this has degenerated to even before entering into debate.
Goading and ambushing are considered valid tactics in this cage-match version of discourse, and I personally don’t need to see PZ take a metaphorical chair to the face just so he can jump from the third turnbuckle.
Images of “Nacho Libre” dance through head…
“Hey Jeremy,
I’ma lawyer and I take exception to being put into the same category as evangelists and politicians. We have much better jokes made about us than them! Mind you I hate most lawyers I know so maybe its an apt categorisation after all.”
Hey, me too!
What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50?
Your honor.
Dear John A Davison-
Sanity: You’re Doing It Wrong.
Is PZ Myers synonymous with PeeWee Herman? I suspect it is else he would have the balls to debate a true scientist. Just do me a favor pharyngula animalians, jump off a cliff, a building, get hit by a truck, get mowed by a tractor, do something…just make sure you die in the end. (p.s: I hope this comment met pharygula posting policy)
(P.S.S: I had no intention of making any death threat. If I was I’d be putting myself at the bottom of the barrel where the resident parasites (ie: pharyngula posters) reside.)
Can has logic?
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/11/lolcreashun.php
No can has logic. Not yours.
Not so. I doubt any Pharynguloid would wish you any of the varied forms of death you’ve just gotten through wishing us.
More likely, most of the people here would wish you one or more of the items on this list:
And my personal favorite:
“go away”
Sure, I will leave you all barking away like the dogs you are.
Woof.
Why, Those Pesky Darwinist:
No, that is not a death threat. But it sure as shit sounds like you will throw a party if, say, some paramilitary group somehow were about to gather all of us up and shot us. Not a death threat at all. You as just a lowly schmuck who is a cheerleader for mass death. Are not you just the most lovely example of humanity.
What’s the matter with Mr. Davidson? Does he hate humanity that much? Or is it just that he wishes those who demonstrate his idiocy no longer existed?
Oh shite, it’s one of those both/and things, isn’t it?
He is right in one thing, “The word “debate” doesn’t even exist in the lexicon of science.” Not in the sense that scientists shouldn’t debate things, but in the sense that science isn’t made in debates. You cannot argue truth into existence.
So, in other words, my comment “almost” met fairyngula posting policy?
I wonder what a “true” scientist is?
Maybe it means “fake” scientist, in this context?
I’m sorry, was that ‘true scientist’ comment from our well-wisher in reference to JAD?
It took me a full five minutes to make that tentative connection. I can only suppose that, in his/her lexicon, “true scientist” is a euphamism for “batshit crazy enemy of reason”.
In any case, I’m certain it’s not balls that PZ lacks in declining this tempting offer, but rather sufficient control over his gorge.
gah–euphEmism. Sorry, sticklers.