I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
my understanding of creationism and the influence of
fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
version of science on our chldren.

Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
information about the specifics of ID while providing
refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
a much wider persuit of information and understinging
of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
that provided by my basic biology classes in college.

There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
each of you for reaching out to the general public and
I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
accessible.

I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
chairside table and to which I refer frequently.

I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
has been served.

Again, thanks to you all.

On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
> version of science on our chldren.
>
> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
> information about the specifics of ID while providing
> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
>
> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
> accessible.
>
> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
>
> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
> has been served.
>
> Again, thanks to you all.
>

I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.

The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.

The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
mission alive.

Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.

Ron Okimoto

On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
> > I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
> > purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
> > This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
> > my understanding of creationism and the influence of
> > fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
> > with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
> > version of science on our chldren.
> >
> > Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
> > have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
> > information about the specifics of ID while providing
> > refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
> > a much wider persuit of information and understinging
> > of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
> > that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
> >
> > There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
> > to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
> > nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
> > was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
> > knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
> > each of you for reaching out to the general public and
> > I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
> > accessible.
> >
> > I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
> > The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
> > chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
> >
> > I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
> > to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
> > has been served.
> >
> > Again, thanks to you all.
> >
> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
>
> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
>
> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
> mission alive.
>
> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.

"Fides quaerens intellectum" - "Faith seeking understanding”, which means that faith in God revealed in Jesus Christ prompts a questioning search for deeper understanding (Anselm of Canterbury, 1033–1109).

But even if the order was reversed for me, why would I seek to "support my religious beliefs...likely knowing that ID has been a scam from the beginning"?

You're saying that I'm likely an intentional liar. Just so we're clear with each other, is that your intention?

>
> Ron Okimoto

On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
> > I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
> > purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
> > This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
> > my understanding of creationism and the influence of
> > fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
> > with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
> > version of science on our chldren.
> >
> > Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
> > have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
> > information about the specifics of ID while providing
> > refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
> > a much wider persuit of information and understinging
> > of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
> > that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
> >
> > There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
> > to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
> > nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
> > was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
> > knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
> > each of you for reaching out to the general public and
> > I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
> > accessible.
> >
> > I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
> > The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
> > chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
> >
> > I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
> > to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
> > has been served.
> >
> > Again, thanks to you all.
> >
> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
>
> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
>
> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
> mission alive.
>
> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.

You say that I have "likely known that ID has been a scam from the beginning". Just so we're clear with each other: you are meaning to call me a knowing liar?

> Ron Okimoto

On 12/3/2023 5:41 PM, MarkE wrote:
> On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
>> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
>>> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
>>> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
>>> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
>>> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
>>> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
>>> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
>>> version of science on our chldren.
>>>
>>> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
>>> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
>>> information about the specifics of ID while providing
>>> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
>>> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
>>> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
>>> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
>>>
>>> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
>>> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
>>> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
>>> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
>>> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
>>> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
>>> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
>>> accessible.
>>>
>>> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
>>> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
>>> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
>>>
>>> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
>>> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
>>> has been served.
>>>
>>> Again, thanks to you all.
>>>
>> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
>> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
>> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
>> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
>> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
>> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
>>
>> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
>> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
>>
>> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
>> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
>> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
>> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
>> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
>> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
>> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
>> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
>> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
>> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
>> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
>> mission alive.
>>
>> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
>> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
>> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
>> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.
>
> "Fides quaerens intellectum" - "Faith seeking understanding”, which means that faith in God revealed in Jesus Christ prompts a questioning search for deeper understanding (Anselm of Canterbury, 1033–1109).

It doesn't matter why you do it, it is still nuts for you to continue to
go back to people that you know have been lying to you for decades in
order to achieve that understanding.

>
> But even if the order was reversed for me, why would I seek to "support my religious beliefs...likely knowing that ID has been a scam from the beginning"?
>
> You're saying that I'm likely an intentional liar. Just so we're clear with each other, is that your intention?

I wrote just what I wrote. It just is nuts that you would go to a group
that you know has been lying about the situation for decades. What type
of understanding could you ever achieve by doing that? What is worse is
that you do it because you seem to agree with what they have been
selling. You obviously can't find the understanding that you seek where
you are seeking it. Your own experience has told you that for decades.

If you really were seeking understanding, you would not be wallowing in
denial, but you would be seeking out what can be understood out of the
mess. When the ID perps put out their Top Six, they did it in such a
way so that even the most lost IDiots like Bill understood that they had
never wanted the ID perps to accomplish any ID science. The reality has
always been that the ID perps would have only added to our current
understanding of the creation. Denial isn't understanding what is
already understood.

Ron Okimoto
>
>>
>> Ron Okimoto
>

On 12/3/2023 5:57 PM, MarkE wrote:
> On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
>> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
>>> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
>>> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
>>> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
>>> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
>>> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
>>> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
>>> version of science on our chldren.
>>>
>>> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
>>> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
>>> information about the specifics of ID while providing
>>> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
>>> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
>>> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
>>> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
>>>
>>> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
>>> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
>>> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
>>> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
>>> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
>>> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
>>> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
>>> accessible.
>>>
>>> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
>>> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
>>> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
>>>
>>> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
>>> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
>>> has been served.
>>>
>>> Again, thanks to you all.
>>>
>> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
>> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
>> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
>> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
>> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
>> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
>>
>> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
>> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
>>
>> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
>> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
>> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
>> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
>> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
>> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
>> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
>> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
>> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
>> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
>> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
>> mission alive.
>>
>> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
>> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
>> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
>> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.
>
> You say that I have "likely known that ID has been a scam from the beginning". Just so we're clear with each other: you are meaning to call me a knowing liar?

What would you be lying about? I wrote just what I wrote. In all your
years on TO I have not known you to have supported the ID scam claptrap.
You seem to have always known that it was something bogus and tended
to stay clear of the stupid claims. You seemed to be an anti-evolution
creationist, but you weren't as lost as nearly all the others that have
ever posted to TO.

So why start supporting the ID scam junk, now, after most of the IDiots
have given up on the scam? It may be the only game left in town, but
that doesn't mean that it isn't as stupid and dishonest as it has always
been.

You can check out the failure of the Reason to Believe IDiots. They
claim to be intelligent design advocates, but also admit that they are
doing it to support their Biblical interpretations. Their understanding
doesn't fit into reality. Trying to fit the Biblical creation story
into this reality is just never going to work. Nature is not Biblical.
We have known that for centuries. Are you a geocentric flat earth
creationists? Are you a 7 day young earth creationist? Do you believe
that the sun and moon are embedded in the firmament and that the sun and
moon were created a day after land plants were created?

You probably should check out BioLogos to see how they have approached
understanding the creation. A lot of them are evangelical Christians,
so they are not lacking in faith.

https://biologos.org/

Ron Okimoto
>
>> Ron Okimoto
>

On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 12:36:58 PM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
> On 12/3/2023 5:57 PM, MarkE wrote:
> > On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
> >> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
> >>> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
> >>> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
> >>> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
> >>> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
> >>> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
> >>> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
> >>> version of science on our chldren.
> >>>
> >>> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
> >>> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
> >>> information about the specifics of ID while providing
> >>> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
> >>> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
> >>> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
> >>> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
> >>>
> >>> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
> >>> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
> >>> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
> >>> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
> >>> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
> >>> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
> >>> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
> >>> accessible.
> >>>
> >>> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
> >>> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
> >>> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
> >>>
> >>> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
> >>> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
> >>> has been served.
> >>>
> >>> Again, thanks to you all.
> >>>
> >> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
> >> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
> >> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
> >> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died..
> >> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
> >> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
> >>
> >> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
> >> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
> >>
> >> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
> >> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
> >> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
> >> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
> >> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
> >> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
> >> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
> >> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
> >> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
> >> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
> >> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
> >> mission alive.
> >>
> >> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
> >> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
> >> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
> >> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.
> >
> > You say that I have "likely known that ID has been a scam from the beginning". Just so we're clear with each other: you are meaning to call me a knowing liar?
> What would you be lying about? I wrote just what I wrote. In all your
> years on TO I have not known you to have supported the ID scam claptrap.
> You seem to have always known that it was something bogus and tended
> to stay clear of the stupid claims. You seemed to be an anti-evolution
> creationist, but you weren't as lost as nearly all the others that have
> ever posted to TO.
>
> So why start supporting the ID scam junk, now, after most of the IDiots
> have given up on the scam? It may be the only game left in town, but
> that doesn't mean that it isn't as stupid and dishonest as it has always
> been.

ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:

Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology
Tour; Long Story Short - OoL
Behe - IC, wait time problem
Axe - protein space sparsity
Dembski - complexity and specificity

Have you listened to Stephen Meyer in extended conversation with sceptic David Shermer? Anyone who calls Meyer an "IDiot", "perp", or "scammer" is the real idiot.

>
> You can check out the failure of the Reason to Believe IDiots. They
> claim to be intelligent design advocates, but also admit that they are
> doing it to support their Biblical interpretations. Their understanding
> doesn't fit into reality. Trying to fit the Biblical creation story
> into this reality is just never going to work. Nature is not Biblical.
> We have known that for centuries. Are you a geocentric flat earth
> creationists? Are you a 7 day young earth creationist? Do you believe
> that the sun and moon are embedded in the firmament and that the sun and
> moon were created a day after land plants were created?

From memory, RTB rejects macroevolution but accepts an old earth/universe. A hybrid which attempts to reconcile science and its interpretation of the biblical account.

>
> You probably should check out BioLogos to see how they have approached
> understanding the creation. A lot of them are evangelical Christians,
> so they are not lacking in faith.
>
> https://biologos.org/

I appreciate the intent of RTB and BioLogos to take seriously scientific evidence and scripture. How successful they are is of course disputed.

> Ron Okimoto
> >
> >> Ron Okimoto
> >

On 12/6/2023 12:05 AM, MarkE wrote:
> On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 12:36:58 PM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
>> On 12/3/2023 5:57 PM, MarkE wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 6:01:58 AM UTC+11, RonO wrote:
>>>> On 12/3/2023 12:07 PM, Dexter wrote:
>>>>> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
>>>>> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
>>>>> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
>>>>> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
>>>>> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
>>>>> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
>>>>> version of science on our chldren.
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
>>>>> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
>>>>> information about the specifics of ID while providing
>>>>> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
>>>>> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
>>>>> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
>>>>> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
>>>>> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
>>>>> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
>>>>> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
>>>>> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
>>>>> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
>>>>> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
>>>>> accessible.
>>>>>
>>>>> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
>>>>> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
>>>>> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
>>>>>
>>>>> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
>>>>> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
>>>>> has been served.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, thanks to you all.
>>>>>
>>>> I do not know what the future of the creationist ID scam is going to be.
>>>> The ID perps at the Discovery Institute shot themselves in the head
>>>> half a decade ago, and ID pretty much died on TO. IDiots on TO were not
>>>> the only casualties of the suicide attempt. Uncommon Descent also died.
>>>> The ID perps do not allow comments to their ID scam junk so currently
>>>> discussion is limited to individual IDiotic bloggers.
>>>>
>>>> The Pandas thumb still puts up the ID perp junk for discussion, but
>>>> IDiotic creationist input seems to be limited.
>>>>
>>>> The ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute still has political backers
>>>> that are footing the bills. As sad as it may be it is the only half way
>>>> viable creationist game in town even if the majority of their
>>>> creationist support never wanted them to accomplish any creation
>>>> science. These backers do not seem to be backing the ID science, but
>>>> they are supporting the original theocratic mission of the ID scam unit.
>>>> Making believe that the ID scam is still viable seems to be their only
>>>> option to keep their religious political mission going. The ID perps
>>>> have been using ID as the bait to keep that political mission going for
>>>> over 2 decades. The obfuscation and denial switch scam that they give
>>>> the rubes instead is their only option to keep the original political
>>>> mission alive.
>>>>
>>>> Keeping the scam going seems to keep creationists like MarkE in the
>>>> game. The sad thing is that MarkE has likely known that ID has been a
>>>> scam from the beginning. So why he would cite the ID perps in order to
>>>> support his religious beliefs is sort of nuts.
>>>
>>> You say that I have "likely known that ID has been a scam from the beginning". Just so we're clear with each other: you are meaning to call me a knowing liar?
>> What would you be lying about? I wrote just what I wrote. In all your
>> years on TO I have not known you to have supported the ID scam claptrap.
>> You seem to have always known that it was something bogus and tended
>> to stay clear of the stupid claims. You seemed to be an anti-evolution
>> creationist, but you weren't as lost as nearly all the others that have
>> ever posted to TO.
>>
>> So why start supporting the ID scam junk, now, after most of the IDiots
>> have given up on the scam? It may be the only game left in town, but
>> that doesn't mean that it isn't as stupid and dishonest as it has always
>> been.
>
> ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:
>
> Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology

Did you watch the Meyer Sherman "discussion" on Meyer's "God
Hypothesis". In that discussion Meyer admitted that he was not dealing
with "a" god hypothesis, but was building enough gap denial to support
some type of god hypothesis. He wasn't interested in applying any of
the denial to his own religious beliefs. You know why he doesn't want
to do that. Meyer is likely an old earth creationist like they have at
Reason to Believe, and he understands that the designer that fits into
his 25 million year period over half a billion years ago is not his
Biblical designer. Meyer never wanted to fill that gap. It would just
be more science that creatiionists would have to deny. The Reason to
Believe IDiots use Meyer's Cambrian Explosion gap denial, but only for
gap denial. It doesn't fit into their Biblical model so they have to
deny that sea creatures existed long before the land plants existed that
were supposed to be created first. The Big Bang and fine tuning
cosmology has made them alter the "day" that the sun and moon were
created. They have a stupid claim that the sun and moon were created
much earlier, but just were not visible until day 4. You know it is a
stupid claim to try to fit reality into the Biblical account because
there were not any life forms to "see" the sun and moon for billions of
years. Their existence would have only mattered to the creator.

Meyer has nothing for you.

> Tour; Long Story Short - OoL

Tour is a dishonest Biblical creationist. He knows that he is being
dishonest because he has acknowledged that he doesn't know how to do any
ID science. He knew that the ID scam had been a scam since the
beginning, but he still wanted to defend it's Biblical roots. Like you,
Tour likely does not want to believe in the designer that is responsible
for filling the origin of life gap. He is only using it for denial
purposes. This is not the designer depicted in the Bible. You can go
to the Reason to Believe IDiots and see them admitting that the origin
of life is never mentioned in the Bible. Even though they want to
maintain the Biblical order of creation (land plants first, sea
creatures, and then land animals). They have to claim that a lot is not
mentioned in the Bible, but biological evolution is not mentioned in the
Bible. In order to keep denying biological evolution they have to
maintain their order of creation, and that is just nuts. They even
claim that whales were among the sea creatures created before their
terrestrial mammalian ancestors.

Tour has nothing for you.

> Behe - IC, wait time problem

Behe admits that Biological evolution is a fact of nature. You should
recall the whale evolution fiasco that involved Glenn and Nyikos. In
that article Behe claimed that whale evolution was macro evolution, and
that it was the type of evolution that would be expected to occur by
Darwinian mechanisms. Behe was only throwing the IDiots a bone by
claiming that it was a bad type of evolution that he called devolution.
It happened by Darwinian mechanisms, but it wasn't the good type of
evolution that his designer was responsible for. The last thing that
you want Behe to do would be for him to do the science and confirm that
his designer is responsible for his IC flagellum. He would know what
existed at the time (over a billion years ago) and he would know how it
had changed so that he could identify his 3 neutral mutations that would
have had to occur within a limited period of time to evolve a function
necessary for the evolution of the flagellum. That is not the Biblical
designer. The Reason to Believe IDiots would have to reject it. Just
think that his IC blood clotting and adaptive immune IC systems all
evolved in sea creatures before land plants existed, not only that, but
the designer would have evolved those systems from material that already
existed in the ancestors of those creatures.

On 12/5/23 10:05 PM, MarkE wrote:
> [...]
> ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:
>
> Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology

Meyer misrepresents the Cambrian and tries to keep you from looking at
all the evolutionary change that happened before and after it. I don't
remember what he said about cosmology, probably because it was so easily
dismissed out of hand.

> Tour; Long Story Short - OoL

I.e., nothing.

> Behe - IC, wait time problem

Behe still ignores the fact that IC is easily, probably routinely,
produced by natural evolutionary processes. He works hard to prove his
pet hypothesis true, rather than check whether it is or not.

> Axe - protein space sparsity

"Look! Among all this great quantity, I found a gap!"

> Dembski - complexity and specificity

Specified complexity is another term for a non-trivial copy. All
Dembski has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes
reproduction.

--
Mark Isaak
"Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

On Thursday, December 7, 2023 at 8:27:02 AM UTC-8, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 12/5/23 10:05 PM, MarkE wrote:
> > [...]
> > ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:
> >
> > Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology
> Meyer misrepresents the Cambrian and tries to keep you from looking at
> all the evolutionary change that happened before and after it. I don't
> remember what he said about cosmology, probably because it was so easily
> dismissed out of hand.
> > Tour; Long Story Short - OoL
> I.e., nothing.
> > Behe - IC, wait time problem
> Behe still ignores the fact that IC is easily, probably routinely,
> produced by natural evolutionary processes. He works hard to prove his
> pet hypothesis true, rather than check whether it is or not.
> > Axe - protein space sparsity
> "Look! Among all this great quantity, I found a gap!"
> > Dembski - complexity and specificity
> Specified complexity is another term for a non-trivial copy. All
> Dembski has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction.
>
> --
> Mark Isaak
> "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
> doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell
"All [...] has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction." would make a
good Chez Watt.

On Thursday 7 December 2023 at 23:42:02 UTC+2, erik simpson wrote:
>
> "All [...] has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction." would make a
> good Chez Watt.
>
Category: Proof of 8==D reported.

On 12/7/2023 10:24 AM, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 12/5/23 10:05 PM, MarkE wrote:
>> [...]
>> ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But
>> I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:
>>
>> Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology
>
> Meyer misrepresents the Cambrian and tries to keep you from looking at
> all the evolutionary change that happened before and after it.  I don't
> remember what he said about cosmology, probably because it was so easily
> dismissed out of hand.
>
>> Tour; Long Story Short - OoL
>
> I.e., nothing.
>
>> Behe - IC, wait time problem
>
> Behe still ignores the fact that IC is easily, probably routinely,
> produced by natural evolutionary processes.  He works hard to prove his
> pet hypothesis true, rather than check whether it is or not.

Actually Behe admitted that IC systems could evolve in his responses to
his critics at the turn of the century over 20 years ago. I recall that
his example was the lever and fulcrum type of IC system. That is why he
had to start claiming that his IC systems had something extra. At first
he emphasized "well matched parts" but he could never tell anyone how to
measure it in order to tell if his systems had enough of it. Behe
started claiming that his IC systems would be identified by the order
and arrangement of the mutations needed to create them from the
preexisting sequences. He came up with his 3 neutral mutations that had
to be required to make something IC. If the 3 neutral mutations
occurred to create a new function in a certain period of time that would
make a system his type of IC system. You no longer needed interacting
parts and evolution of a single protein would do. It was the basis of
his book "The Edge of Evolution", but Behe never found any examples that
exceeded his limit. He only claimed that they must exist in his IC
systems. All the examples that we have figured out do not exceed Behe's
limit, so that is why he denigrated the findings as being on the "edge"
of evolution. It was as stupid as his whale devolution stupidity. Behe
actually admitted that whales had evolved from terrestrial mammals, and
called it an example of macro evolution that Darwinian mechanisms would
have been expected to have been able to do. He only denigrated that
type of evolution by calling it devolution and evolution by breaking
things. As stupid as it may seem Behe was just claiming that his
designer could have done a better job, but obviously had not, and that
nature could account for the evolution of whales. IC has been dead for
decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
nothing worth teaching.

Ron Okimoto

>
>> Axe - protein space sparsity
>
> "Look! Among all this great quantity, I found a gap!"
>
>> Dembski - complexity and specificity
>
> Specified complexity is another term for a non-trivial copy.  All
> Dembski has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes
> reproduction.
>

On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

[]
> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
> nothing worth teaching.
>
Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 13:41:12 -0800 (PST), erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 7, 2023 at 8:27:02?AM UTC-8, Mark Isaak wrote:
>> On 12/5/23 10:05 PM, MarkE wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > ID is a broad church - some questionable elements to be expected. But I see value from a number of their exponents, e.g.:
>> >
>> > Meyer - Cambrian, cosmology
>> Meyer misrepresents the Cambrian and tries to keep you from looking at
>> all the evolutionary change that happened before and after it. I don't
>> remember what he said about cosmology, probably because it was so easily
>> dismissed out of hand.
>> > Tour; Long Story Short - OoL
>> I.e., nothing.
>> > Behe - IC, wait time problem
>> Behe still ignores the fact that IC is easily, probably routinely,
>> produced by natural evolutionary processes. He works hard to prove his
>> pet hypothesis true, rather than check whether it is or not.
>> > Axe - protein space sparsity
>> "Look! Among all this great quantity, I found a gap!"
>> > Dembski - complexity and specificity
>> Specified complexity is another term for a non-trivial copy. All
>> Dembski has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction.
>>
>> --
>> Mark Isaak
>> "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
>> doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell
> "All [...] has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction." would make a
>good Chez Watt.

Point of order: Chez Watt rules don't oblige redaction of Dembski's
name, just the names of posters being quoted.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

On 12/7/23 2:22 PM, Öö Tiib wrote:
> On Thursday 7 December 2023 at 23:42:02 UTC+2, erik simpson wrote:
>>
>> "All [...] has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction." would make a
>> good Chez Watt.
>>
> Category: Proof of 8==D reported.

Are either of these (Oo Tiib's or Eric's) a formal nomination?

--
Mark Isaak
"Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

On Friday, December 8, 2023 at 7:52:03 AM UTC-8, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 12/7/23 2:22 PM, Öö Tiib wrote:
> > On Thursday 7 December 2023 at 23:42:02 UTC+2, erik simpson wrote:
> >>
> >> "All [...] has done is to prove mathematically that biology includes reproduction." would make a
> >> good Chez Watt.
> >>
> > Category: Proof of 8==D reported.
> Are either of these (Oo Tiib's or Eric's) a formal nomination?
> --
> Mark Isaak
> "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
> doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell
Sure. Why not? And I don't care whether Dembski's name is redacted or not..

On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
> []
>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
>> nothing worth teaching.
>>
> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
>
>

That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
There is no reason for the rest of TO to keep lying about what the ID
scam has been all these years. Everyone should have faced that reality
long ago. ID died on TO 5 years ago. The ID perps committed suicide.
You can go back into a TO archive and see the ID perps running the bait
and switch on the Utah creationist rubes at the same time they were
dazzling the rest of the IDiot rubes with their Top Six. That was
enough for most of the IDiots on TO to call it quits. Making believe
that something else happened isn't going to change reality.

Ron Okimoto

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
> > RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > []
> >> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
> >> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
> >> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
> >> nothing worth teaching.
> >>
> > Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
> >
> >
>
> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.

*My* post?

> There is no reason for the rest of TO to keep lying about what the ID
> scam has been all these years. Everyone should have faced that reality
> long ago. ID died on TO 5 years ago. The ID perps committed suicide.
> You can go back into a TO archive and see the ID perps running the bait
> and switch on the Utah creationist rubes at the same time they were
> dazzling the rest of the IDiot rubes with their Top Six. That was
> enough for most of the IDiots on TO to call it quits. Making believe
> that something else happened isn't going to change reality.
>
Too many. I count 1 "bait and switch" "lying" "ID scam" "IDiots" "Top
Six" 2 "perps" and 2 "rubes". Perhaps I should add "reality" to the list.

I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
key words.

You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 12/9/2023 4:07 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> []
>>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
>>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
>>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
>>>> nothing worth teaching.
>>>>
>>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
>
> *My* post?

Yes, your worthless post. What happened, happened 5 years ago. The
senseless denial and blame is stupid at this point. If you did not have
anything to add to the discussion you should have not posted anything.
You all seem to have ended up in the same boat as Nyikos, and were just
as clueless. Nyikos was clueless beccause he lives by willful ignorance
of the ID scam. All the rest just seemed to want to believe that there
was something worth discussing. Harping about something that is just
telling things like they have been for over 20 years is not going to
change the fact that you just missed the boat because of your own
incompetence.

No matter how much you have come to dislike the terminology because of
the sour grapes of missing out on what happened five years ago is just
too stupid for anyone to contemplate at this time. The ID perps are
still perpetrating the bait and switch. They have never stopped doing
that since they started over 2 decades ago. All the IDiots demonstrated
themselves to be worse than idiots. It may be a reminder of how lost
you were, but that isn't my fault. You all disregarded reality on your
own. Denial of what was going on was something that you needed to do
for your own reasons. I really had no idea that all of you didn't have
a clue as to what happened to ID on TO until I started getting blamed
for driving away the IDiots with some stupid refutation of the Top Six.
All that anyone had needed to do was actually read and understand what I
had posted. The IDiots that quit the ID scam could do that. Dean
understood that I was not refuting the Top Six when he made the claim
that I wasn't refuting the Top Six. Nyikos finally got clued in and
made the same claim. All that I had ever done was put up the Top Six as
the ID perps had done it, and later I just started pointing out how even
the ID perps could not deal with the Top Six in an honest and straight
forward manner.

I have been justified in using the terminology since I started, and
subsequent history has just indicated that it was being too mild. You
should be ashamed of your stupid antics in the face of reality.

Counting is something Nyikos does with the lies he tells. He has a
limit for telling the same lie or doing the same dishonest deed, and he
tries very hard not to exceed that limit. Count all you want to, it
will never change reality.

TO has to come to grips with reality, and everyone has to take
responsibility for themselves. There is no reason for me to stop using
descriptions that fit into how things actually are, and no reason for
anyone to start objecting to it at this late date because I had been
using the terminology for over a decade before the ID perps committed
suicide by putting out the Top Six. Uncommon descent died too, and I
never posted over there. I just noted that they could not deal with the
Top Six in an honest and straightforward manner just like the TO IDiots
and the ID perps at the Discovery Institute.

Ron Okimoto

>
>> There is no reason for the rest of TO to keep lying about what the ID
>> scam has been all these years. Everyone should have faced that reality
>> long ago. ID died on TO 5 years ago. The ID perps committed suicide.
>> You can go back into a TO archive and see the ID perps running the bait
>> and switch on the Utah creationist rubes at the same time they were
>> dazzling the rest of the IDiot rubes with their Top Six. That was
>> enough for most of the IDiots on TO to call it quits. Making believe
>> that something else happened isn't going to change reality.
>>
> Too many. I count 1 "bait and switch" "lying" "ID scam" "IDiots" "Top
> Six" 2 "perps" and 2 "rubes". Perhaps I should add "reality" to the list.
>
> I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
> key words.
>
> You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
> feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.
>

Ofcourse the real effect of abondoning creationism has been to marginalize subjectivity. Bad opinions, weird ideology, and mental illness, have exploded, especially at universities. The students and professors at universities are falling prey to a pattern of corruption that starts with conceiving of choosing in terms of figuring out the best option, instead of in terms of spontaneity, succumbing to the psychological pressure to do their best.

And things will only be getting from bad to worse. Certainly if we didn't have the holocaust already, we would be having it now. Teaching about the history of the holocaust is now doing the job of preventing a samelike catastrophy. The students and professors are well into socialism, left wing socialism, but eventually they will inevtiably turn to right wing socialism. These people can really only see communism and nazism as the 2 available options for them. Maybe south africa will collapse, and that will turn academic people into nazis. Or maybe some big cities, or states in the USA will collapse.

The whole evolutionist rubbish is defeated, by looking at the logic used with subjective words in common discourse. That logic shows creationism is true, that there is a subjective part of reality, which chooses how the objective part of reality ends up. But the evolutionists are blinded by the feelings associated to doing their best, to acknowledge the subjective spirit choosing things.

So we are in a dark age, with an unending series of catastrophies.

Op zondag 3 december 2023 om 19:11:58 UTC+1 schreef Dexter:
> I began following Talk.Origins in late 1997 having
> purchased my first desktop and discovering usenet.
> This newsgroup has played a fundamental role in
> my understanding of creationism and the influence of
> fundamentalist religious efforts to corrupt public education
> with their falsehoods and and to impose a knowingly false
> version of science on our chldren.
>
> Talk.Origins' efforts in publicizing creationists' actions
> have been immensely successful in spreading reliable
> information about the specifics of ID while providing
> refutations to those claims. My lurking here has led to
> a much wider persuit of information and understinging
> of the details fo evolution. An understanding far beyond
> that provided by my basic biology classes in college.
>
> There are far to many people to thank for their contributions
> to this newsgroup. Their efforts cannot be understated
> nor can they be measured. But this is one lurker who
> was profoundly effected by their sharing of their professional
> knowledge of biology and science in general. I thank
> each of you for reaching out to the general public and
> I thank David Ian Greig for making sure this group remained
> accessible.
>
> I remain a proud owner of a copy of Mark Isaak's book
> The Counter-Creationism Handbook that still rests on my
> chairside table and to which I refer frequently.
>
> I write this as I find that the influence of ID has waned
> to near nonexistence over the years and Talk.Origins' purpose
> has been served.
>
> Again, thanks to you all.

On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:52:47 -0600
RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

> On 12/9/2023 4:07 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
> > RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
> >>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> []
> >>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
> >>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
> >>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
> >>>> nothing worth teaching.
> >>>>
> >>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
> >
> > *My* post?
>
> Yes, your worthless post. What happened, happened 5 years ago. The
> senseless denial and blame is stupid at this point. If you did not have
> anything to add to the discussion you should have not posted anything.

[More screed snipped]

> >
> > I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
> > key words.
> >
> > You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
> > feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.
> >
>
I don't think you read this far.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 12/9/2023 2:34 PM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:52:47 -0600
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 12/9/2023 4:07 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
>>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> []
>>>>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
>>>>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
>>>>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
>>>>>> nothing worth teaching.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
>>>
>>> *My* post?
>>
>> Yes, your worthless post. What happened, happened 5 years ago. The
>> senseless denial and blame is stupid at this point. If you did not have
>> anything to add to the discussion you should have not posted anything.
>
> [More screed snipped]
>
>
>>>
>>> I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
>>> key words.
>>>
>>> You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
>>> feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.
>>>
>>
> I don't think you read this far.
>

Yes, you knew that you should not have posted at all. The repetition
was not an issue, until you made it an issue.

You need to just stop the whining and adjust to what reality has been
for the last 5 years. The current issue is just stupid because it will
not change reality. You all missed the boat, and blaming me isn't going
to change that fact. The TO IDiots will still have quit the ID scam due
to what the ID perps did, and not because of my correct use of
terminology. What kind of idiots had the IDiots always been?

Ron Okimoto

On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 9:12:04 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:
> On 12/9/2023 2:34 PM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:52:47 -0600
> > RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/9/2023 4:07 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
> >>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
> >>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> []
> >>>>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
> >>>>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
> >>>>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
> >>>>>> nothing worth teaching.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
> >>>
> >>> *My* post?
> >>
> >> Yes, your worthless post. What happened, happened 5 years ago. The
> >> senseless denial and blame is stupid at this point. If you did not have
> >> anything to add to the discussion you should have not posted anything.
> >
> > [More screed snipped]
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>> I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
> >>> key words.
> >>>
> >>> You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
> >>> feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.
> >>>
> >>
> > I don't think you read this far.
.........
> Yes, you knew that you should not have posted at all. The repetition
> was not an issue, until you made it an issue.

The repetition of your favorite keywords "scam," "rubes," "perps," "bait-and-switch," has been an issue for many years. It obscures your argument and alienates the people whose minds you are trying to change. Lots of people are telling you that, mostly from the evolution side of the evolution/creation divide. Nobody has a beef with your claims about ID, nobody is running away from "the reality of what happened five years ago about the scam." People on your side of the issue are telling you that you are not communicating effectively.
>
> You need to just stop the whining and adjust to what reality has been
> for the last 5 years. The current issue is just stupid because it will
> not change reality. You all missed the boat, and blaming me isn't going
> to change that fact. The TO IDiots will still have quit the ID scam due
> to what the ID perps did, and not because of my correct use of
> terminology. What kind of idiots had the IDiots always been?
>
> Ron Okimoto

RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> On 12/9/2023 2:34 PM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:52:47 -0600
>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/9/2023 4:07 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600
>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
>>>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> []
>>>>>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
>>>>>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
>>>>>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
>>>>>>> nothing worth teaching.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
>>>>
>>>> *My* post?
>>>
>>> Yes, your worthless post. What happened, happened 5 years ago. The
>>> senseless denial and blame is stupid at this point. If you did not have
>>> anything to add to the discussion you should have not posted anything.
>>
>> [More screed snipped]
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not addressing your argument at all; just the repetitive use of those
>>>> key words.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be arguing into a vacuum, I doubt many here
>>>> feel the need to trawl the TO archive to rehash old battles.
>>>>
>>>
>> I don't think you read this far.
>>
>
> Yes, you knew that you should not have posted at all. The repetition
> was not an issue, until you made it an issue.
>
> You need to just stop the whining and adjust to what reality has been
> for the last 5 years. The current issue is just stupid because it will
> not change reality. You all missed the boat, and blaming me isn't going
> to change that fact. The TO IDiots will still have quit the ID scam due
> to what the ID perps did, and not because of my correct use of
> terminology. What kind of idiots had the IDiots always been?
>
How are you going to change your approach by not falling back on the same
worn out tropes? You could reply with a quick “what I usually say about
perps, scam, IDiots” and it would spare us the TL;DR. Freon Bill has left
the building and Pagano long before him. Do we need to recount their
contributions here?

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 17:39:18 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

>On 12/8/2023 5:48 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:47:32 -0600
>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> []
>>> decades. Behe was a lost cause before that. The ID perps started
>>> running the bait and switch after Behe's responses to his critics. It
>>> was likely one of the main reasons that they understood that they had
>>> nothing worth teaching.
>>>
>> Much better, only 1 "bait and switch" and 1 "perps". Keep it up.
>>
>>
>
>That is all that was needed. Your kind of post doesn't matter any more.
> There is no reason for the rest of TO to keep lying about what the ID
>scam has been all these years. Everyone should have faced that reality
>long ago. ID died on TO 5 years ago.

Why then do you feel the need to post so much about it on TO?

[...]