On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:49:48 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/3/2024 10:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait
>>>> and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at
>>>
>>> [screed]
>>>
>>> Hallelujah, brother!
>>>
>>
>> Nyikosian snipping and running from reality is stupid. You can remain
>> willfully ignorant, but what good does it do you the next time that you
>> screw up because of your ignorance. Joining in with the others when you
>> didn't know what was going on isn't anything worth doing.
>>
>> You might want to try to figure out what things would be like if ID had
>> not been a scam for over 20 years. What if they had never started
>> running the bait and switch, but had gone through with their original
>> Wedge strategy of teaching the junk in the public schools instead of
>> running the bait and switch. You have 20:20 hind sight, and you know
>> what the result of Kitzmiller was, so what do you think would be the
>> case, right now if the ID perps had not started running the bait and
>> switch scam over 20 years ago?
>>
>> Ron Okimoto
>
> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>
> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
> who:
>
> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>
> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>
> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>
> ?
>

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

On 1/5/2024 6:14 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:45:23 -0600
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/4/2024 6:33 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:
>>>>> On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
>>>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait
>>>>>>> and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [screed]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hallelujah, brother!
>>>>>>
>>>>> Amen! Can we go on now?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes
>>>> when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
>>>> you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20
>
> 20 years worth of arguing about who said what and when isn't worth my
> while wading through. I'm just too stupid to remember it all anyway.
> It's all I can do to look at current arguments.
>
>
>>>> years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was
>>>> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
>>>> remind you.
>>>>
>>> Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.
>>>
>>
>> You guys are the ones that are going on about it as if there is some
>> issue with simply stating what reality has been for over 20 years. It
>> is really your issue. Think about it. Who made it an issue? It was
>
> You keep going on about it. I'd like to think that I can summarise on
> behalf of the posters here that no-one here cares except you.

Who made it an issue? Why wouldn't I defend myself against the
stupidity of your efforts? If you didn't want to make it an issue, you
should not have joined in with the ones that were making it an issue.

>
>
>> only to blame someone for their own incompetence. You may not have
>> known that, but what does that tell you about what you have been doing?
>> A lot of TO regulars missed out on what happened when the ID perps put
>> out their Top Six. That wasn't my fault because the IDiots didn't miss
>> what was going on. As far as I am concerned I didn't do anything to
>> warrant the sour grapes harassment for others being ignorant and
>> incompetent.
>>
>
> No-one is currently blaming you, as far as I can see, for anything other
> than dredging up this 20-year old stuff again and again.
>>
> Please move on, post something relevant to today. TIA.
>

You don't even know who made this an issue and why. Get someone to tell
you, and see how far you get. It is a stupid reason, and it should have
never happened.

Ron Okimoto

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

>On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

>> I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

>>
>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>> who:
>>
>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>
>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>
>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>
>> ?
>>
>
>Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>
>Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>
>Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>
>As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>on TO.
>
>Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

On 1/6/2024 1:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>
> My first instincts were right.
>
>>>
>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>> who:
>>>
>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>
>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>
>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>
>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>
>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>
>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>
>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>> on TO.
>>
>> Ron Okimoto
>
> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>

https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/019/304/old.jpg

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>
> My first instincts were right.
>
>>>
>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>> who:
>>>
>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>
>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>
>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>
>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>
>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>
>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>
>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>> on TO.
>>
>> Ron Okimoto
>
> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Ron Okimoto

RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>
>> My first instincts were right.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>> who:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>
>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>
>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>>
>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>>> on TO.
>>>
>>> Ron Okimoto
>>
>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>
>
> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>
Still???

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
> >>
> >> My first instincts were right.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
> >>>> who:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
> >>>>
> >>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
> >>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
> >>>>
> >>>> ?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
> >>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
> >>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
> >>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
> >>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
> >>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
> >>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
> >>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
> >>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
> >>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
> >>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
> >>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
> >>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
> >>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
> >>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
> >>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
> >>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
> >>>
> >>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
> >>>
> >>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
> >>>
> >>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
> >>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
> >>> on TO.
> >>>
> >>> Ron Okimoto
> >>
> >> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
> >> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
> >> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
> >>
> >
> > As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
> > this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
> > comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
> > Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
> >
> Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>
>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>>>>
>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>
>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>
>> Still???
>
> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>
MarkE isn't even here any more. We don't have any more creationists.
We have no reason to be!

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 4:07:32 PM UTC-5, erik simpson wrote:
> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> >> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
> >>>>
> >>>> My first instincts were right.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
> >>>>>> who:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
> >>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
> >>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
> >>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
> >>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
> >>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
> >>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
> >>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
> >>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
> >>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
> >>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
> >>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
> >>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
> >>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
> >>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
> >>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
> >>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
> >>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
> >>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
> >>>>> on TO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ron Okimoto
> >>>>
> >>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
> >>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
> >>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
> >>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
> >>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
> >>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
> >>>
> >> Still???
> >
> > The beatings will continue until morale improves!
> >
> MarkE isn't even here any more. We don't have any more creationists.
> We have no reason to be!

But we have no reason not 2B

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>
>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>> because he
>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>> messed
>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>> failed
>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>> teach
>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>> here
>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>
>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>> situation?
>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>
>>> Still???
>>
>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>
> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
> have no reason to be!
>

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Ron Okimoto

erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>
>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>
>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>
>>> Still???
>>
>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>
> MarkE isn't even here any more. We don't have any more creationists.
> We have no reason to be!
>
I thought Mark Isaak was the Mark that Ron was going on about for whatever
reason. Not MarkE. I find no real importance in finding out any more about
that tiff, but we will probably keep hearing about it.

RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>> situation?
>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>
>>>> Still???
>>>
>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>
>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>> have no reason to be!
>>
>
> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>
> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>
Let it go.

On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>
>>>> Still???
>>>
>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>
>> MarkE isn't even here any more. We don't have any more creationists.
>> We have no reason to be!
>>
> I thought Mark Isaak was the Mark that Ron was going on about for whatever
> reason. Not MarkE. I find no real importance in finding out any more about
> that tiff, but we will probably keep hearing about it.
>
Yeah, I thought it was MarkE. I'm not reading this repetitive crap
carefully, and I don't intend to. Very tragic.

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Still???
>>>>
>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>
>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>>> have no reason to be!
>>>
>>
>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>>
>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>>
> Let it go.
>

Tell that to Mark and the others. Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ron Okimoto

On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:
> On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are
>>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to
>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They
>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able
>>>>>>>> to teach
>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at
>>>>>>>> lying
>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking
>>>>>>>> Mark when
>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of
>>>>>>>> TO, and
>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
>>>>>>>> left here
>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Still???
>>>>
>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>
>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
>>> We have no reason to be!
>>>
>> I thought Mark Isaak was the Mark that Ron was going on about for
>> whatever
>> reason. Not MarkE. I find no real importance in finding out any more
>> about
>> that tiff, but we will probably keep hearing about it.
>>
> Yeah, I thought it was MarkE.  I'm not reading this repetitive crap
> carefully, and I don't intend to.  Very tragic.
>
This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
you did what you did.

Ron Okimoto

RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still???
>>>>>
>>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>>
>>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>>>> have no reason to be!
>>>>
>>>
>>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
>>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
>>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>>>
>>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>>>
>> Let it go.
>>
>
> Tell that to Mark and the others.

Isaac or Isaak? Both?

> Really, Mark made this an issue
> months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.
>
Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 08:02:34 -0600
RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:

> On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:
> > On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> >> erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> >>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> >>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….

[]
> >
> This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
> you did what you did.
>

The worst thing about TO is lack of snipping. The second worst thing about
TO is repetitive posts about some dispute 20 years ago.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>>>
>>>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>>>>> have no reason to be!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
>>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
>>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
>>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
>>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
>>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
>>>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
>>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
>>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
>>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
>>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
>>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
>>>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
>>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
>>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>>>>
>>>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
>>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>>>>
>>> Let it go.
>>>
>>
>> Tell that to Mark and the others.
>
> Isaac or Isaak? Both?
>
>> Really, Mark made this an issue
>> months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.
>>
> Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.
>
>
>
Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.

Ron Okimoto

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 13:53:14 +0000, "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
wrote:

>The worst thing about TO is lack of snipping.

How ironic that you recently complained about my snipping.

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

RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
> On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Still???
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>>>>>> have no reason to be!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
>>>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
>>>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
>>>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
>>>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
>>>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
>>>>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
>>>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
>>>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
>>>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
>>>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
>>>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
>>>>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
>>>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
>>>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>>>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
>>>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>>>>>
>>>> Let it go.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tell that to Mark and the others.
>>
>> Isaac or Isaak? Both?
>>
>>> Really, Mark made this an issue
>>> months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.
>>>
>> Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.
>>
>>
>>
> Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.
>
Why unless applied to your repetitive screeds? And are Isaac and Isaak the
same person? If so why not spell their name as they do. Weird.

On 1/6/24 4:27 PM, RonO wrote:
> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are
>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They
>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at
>>>>>>> lying
>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of
>>>>>>> TO, and
>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
>>>>>>> left here
>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>> situation?
>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>
>>>> Still???
>>>
>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>
>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
>> We have no reason to be!
>>
>
> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim.

As far as I have seen, on this issue Martin Harran and I are in complete
agreement.

> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
> who made this an issue. . .

That would be RonO. I was merely one of the messengers.

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

On 1/7/2024 7:53 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 08:02:34 -0600
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>> On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>> erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>
> []
>>>
>> This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
>> you did what you did.
>>
>
> The worst thing about TO is lack of snipping. The second worst thing about
> TO is repetitive posts about some dispute 20 years ago.
>

You don't have to worry about disputes from 20 years ago. The current
issue occurred within the last year twice. Not only that but the ID
perps have never stopped running the bait and switch scam. They will
likely put out a new edition of it this year since the last update was
in 2021. If you had read the history instead snipping it out and
thinking that you knew it all, you would have known that.

What you obviously need to worry about is understanding what the
situation is before jumping in as if you do know.

Ron Okimoto

On 1/7/2024 10:59 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>> RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
>>>>>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
>>>>>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
>>>>>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
>>>>>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
>>>>>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
>>>>>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left
>>>>>>>>>>>> here
>>>>>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Still???
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
>>>>>>> have no reason to be!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
>>>>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
>>>>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
>>>>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
>>>>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
>>>>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
>>>>>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
>>>>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
>>>>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
>>>>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
>>>>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
>>>>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
>>>>>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
>>>>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
>>>>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>>>>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
>>>>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Let it go.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tell that to Mark and the others.
>>>
>>> Isaac or Isaak? Both?
>>>
>>>> Really, Mark made this an issue
>>>> months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.
>>>>
>>> Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.
>>
> Why unless applied to your repetitive screeds? And are Isaac and Isaak the
> same person? If so why not spell their name as they do. Weird.
>

On 1/7/2024 11:15 PM, Mark Isaak wrote:
> On 1/6/24 4:27 PM, RonO wrote:
>> On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>> On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>>>> RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I know I really shouldn't but ….
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My first instincts were right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
>>>>>>>>> who:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Know and understand what you are posting about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2) Totally agree with what you are saying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are
>>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
>>>>>>>> because he
>>>>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
>>>>>>>> messed
>>>>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to
>>>>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
>>>>>>>> exceptions,
>>>>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They
>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
>>>>>>>> failed
>>>>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able
>>>>>>>> to teach
>>>>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at
>>>>>>>> lying
>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking
>>>>>>>> Mark when
>>>>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
>>>>>>>> missing out
>>>>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
>>>>>>>> misconceptions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of
>>>>>>>> TO, and
>>>>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
>>>>>>>> left here
>>>>>>>> on TO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
>>>>>> situation?
>>>>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Still???
>>>>
>>>> The beatings will continue until morale improves!
>>>>
>>> MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
>>> We have no reason to be!
>>>
>>
>> It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim.
>
> As far as I have seen, on this issue Martin Harran and I are in complete
> agreement.

Then why did you try to lie about the situation by playing the
"opinion" card? Doesn't this mean that you knew that you were lying
about the issue in order to score some rhetorical point? The bait and
switch is fact. It has never stopped going down once they started to do
it. There are no examples of it not going down. It has totally failed
only once in Dover, and we all found out why they had to keep running
the bait and switch. There is no ID science that they have to give to
the rubes. All they have is the obfuscation and denial switch scam.

>
>> What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
>> who made this an issue. . .
>
> That would be RonO.  I was merely one of the messengers.

That would be you and a couple of others. Take responsibility for what
you did. You only blame me for your own incompetence on this issue.

Ron Okimoto
>

On 1/2/2024 6:23 PM, RonO wrote:
Instead of snipping and running from reality, most of TO should likely
read this straightforward history of the ID scam. From the comments a
lot of you never realized what was happening when it was happening. TO
regulars should be able to add to this history.

In order to counter the incessant Nyikosian lies about the situation, I
have linked to news articles of the past to demonstrate that the ID
perps have been running the bait and switch. In the history below I
have the quote from Wells' report on the first bait and switch incident.
According to that report Wells understood that they were not going to
give the Ohio creationists any intelligent design science to teach, but
he still made this claim to the board according to a NY Times account.

QUOTE:
With equal fervor, Jonathan Wells, senior fellow at the Discovery
Institute, a Seattle organization dedicated to alternative scientific
theories, contended that there was enough valid challenge to Darwinian
evolution to justify intelligent design's being ordered into the
classroom curriculum -- not as a religious doctrine, he maintained, but
as a matter of "a growing scientific controversy."
END QUOTE:

https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Ohio-debates-evolution-Scientists-accuse-2864344.php

When the ID perps were first claiming to be able to teach the junk in
the public schools there was no issue with "required" to be taught. I
do not recall the not "required" claims until after Kitzmiller.

Ron Okimoto

> We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait
> and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at
> this time when everyone has 20:20 hindsight into what happened.  This is
> just a history of what the ID scam has been.  I've refrained from using
> perps and rubes, so there isn't that excuse for remaining willfully
> ignorant.  It is all anyone should need to understand what has been
> going on with the ID scam for over 20 years.
>
> Investopedia:
> https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bait-switch.asp
> QUOTE:
> Bait and switch is a morally suspect sales tactic that lures customers
> in with specific claims about the quality or low prices on items that
> turn out to be unavailable in order to upsell them on a similar, pricier
> item.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> Bait and switch tactics are often considered to be a type of fraud, and
> therefore is illegal. Bait and switch scams can fall under a number of
> violations, from breach of contract to false advertising.
> END QUOTE:
>
> The Discovery Institute is not running the bait and switch scam on the
> science side of the issue.  They run the bait and switch on the Biblical
> creationists that want to support the Discovery Institute's CRSC/CSC
> religious-political mission.
>
> It should be noted that the Discovery Institute fellows who have been
> participating in the bait and switch, have claimed that the Wedge
> Document was just a "fund raising" document as an excuse for their
> religious political goals being in their Wedge Strategy.  This point is
> not being made to label the Discovery Institute as a criminal
> organization, but to present the obvious conclusion that the Discovery
> Institute has not only used their claims of being able to teach their
> intelligent design science in the public schools to attract the
> creationist support in order to sell them their obfuscation and denial
> switch scam (an alternative that the Discovery Institute claims has
> nothing to do with their intelligent design science) but they have also
> used the teach ID political ploy to obtain funding.
>
> The Wedge document may have been written in 1998, and exposed in 1999,
> it repeats the original mission statement of the Discovery Institute's
> Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (the ID scam unit) and also
> claims teaching ID in the public schools as one of their 5 year Wedge
> goals.
> The Wedge document:
> https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
>
> One of their 5 year goals:
> QUOTE:
> Ten states begin to rectify ideological imbalance in their science
> curricula & include design theory
> END QUOTE
>
> It is just a fact that when the Discovery Institute had convinced states
> to teach ID they began running the bait and switch instead of following
> through with their stated Wedge strategy.  The Discovery Institute had
> secured enough notoriety so that they not only had to run the bait and
> switch on Ohio in March 2002, but there were 3 or 4 other states within
> the next month or two that had the bait and switch run on them.  I
> recall Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Montana also came forward and wanted to
> teach intelligent design in their public schools.  The Discovery
> Institute would have been well on their way to meeting their 5 year
> goals, but they started running the bait and switch instead.
>
> In politics the bait and switch is morally suspect, but not illegal
> because the perpetrator can always claim that they just changed their
> minds, but in the case of the ID scam, after changing their minds, they
> continued to sell intelligent design as the bait to this day.  So after
> Ohio in 2002 all the subsequent bait and switch incidences were enacted
> after the Discovery Institute's CRSC fellows had changed their minds
> about being able to teach ID in the public schools.
>
> The Thomas More lawyer defending the Dover ID creationists was fully
> aware that the bait and switch was being run by the Discovery Institute,
> but he called it a "strategy".  The bait and switch is a political
> strategy, but is morally bankrupt, and dishonest.
>
> http://ncse.com/news/2005/10/discovery-institute-thomas-more-law-center-squabble-aei-foru-00704
>
> QUOTE:
> So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the
> Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
> it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
> places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
> design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a
> compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
> Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we
> thought we could present
> END QUOTE:
>
> The so called "compromise" is the current obfuscation and denial teach
> the controversy switch scam.  For political-legal reasons the Discovery
> Institute tells their creationist supporters that this switch scam has
> nothing to do with ID.  They tell this lie even though teaching ID in
> the public schools was part of the original teach the controversy plan.
>
> The bait and switch had gone down dozens of times before the Dover
> fiasco hit the fan, and not a single group of creationist ID supporters
> were given any ID science to teach in their public schools.  The bait
> and switch has gone down in every single instance.
>
> During the Dover fiasco after Barbara Forrest was deposed (Dembski was
> present at the deposition) for Kitzmiller, the Discovery Institute
> fellows knew that the name switch from creationism to intelligent design
> was going to be exposed, and half of them quit as expert witnesses.
> Forrest had evidence that "Of Pandas and People" had been transformed
> from a creationist textbook to intelligent design after the Supreme
> Court decision that creation science wasn't any type of science that
> could be taught in the public schools.  Thaxton was the editor, Kenyon
> was one of the two main authors.  Behe admitted to writing some of
> Pandas' later edition, but was not credited.  Meyer had written the
> teachers notes for the textbook, and Dembski was then editing the next
> edition of Pandas.  The drafts of Dembski's book had also been
> subpoenaed, but the subpoena was dropped when Dembski ran away.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Pandas_and_People
>
> Everyone should read the NCSE archive of the Thomas More lawyer incident
> because it has the Discovery Institute rep lying about the Discovery
> Institute claiming to be able to teach ID in the public schools, and the
> More lawyer had to demonstrate that, that was a lie by pulling the
> booklet on teaching ID in the public schools out of his pocket and
> quoting from it.  This was the booklet that the Discovery Institute used
> to give out with their ID Wedge video before they started running the
> bait and switch in 2002.  In 2005 this booklet was still available in
> pdf form for free when the Dover fiasco was occurring.
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58
>
> This link will take you back to a Discovery Institute web page to
> download their Teach the Controversy strategy.  I accessed this web page
> by looking at what Wayback had backed up of the Discovery Institute web
> site in mid 2005.  Teaching ID was part of their "Teach the Controversy"
> Wedge strategy before they started running the bait and switch on
> creationist ID supporters.  You can "click here" and download a pdf of
> the booklet that the Thomas More lawyer quoted from. The material was
> still available on the Discovery Institute web site during the Dover
> fiasco.
>
> The Dover creationists had followed their recommendations in obtaining
> "Of Pandas and People" to teach the ID science.
>
> From the Conclusions:
> QUOTE:
> Local school boards and state education officials are frequently
> pressured to avoid teaching the controversy regarding biological
> origins. Indeed, many groups, such as the National Academy of Sciences,
> go so far as to deny the existence of any genuine scientific controversy
> about the issue.(162) Nevertheless, teachers should be reassured that
> they have the right to expose their students to the problems as well as
> the appeal of Darwinian theory. Moreover, as the previous discussion
> demonstrates, school boards have the authority to permit, and even
> encourage, teaching about design theory as an alternative to Darwinian
> evolution--and this includes the use of textbooks such as Of Pandas and
> People that present evidence for the theory of intelligent design.
> END QUOTE:
>
> Original mission statement of the Discovery Institute CRSC (Center for
> Renewal of Science and Culture):
> http://web.archive.org/web/19980114111554/http://discovery.org/crsc/aboutcrsc.html
>
> QUOTE:
> THE proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one
> of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. Its
> influence can be detected in most, if not all, of the West's greatest
> achievements, including representative democracy, human rights, free
> enterprise, and progress in the arts and sciences.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture
> seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its damning
> cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural
> sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center
> explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science
> raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the
> case for the supernatural. The Center awards fellowships for original
> research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the
> opportunities for life after materialism.
> END QUOTE:
>
> If you use the above link you should note the Discovery Institute's logo
> of God and Adam.  There was no doubt that the mission was a
> religious-political mission.  This is the mission that the fellows of
> the CRSC signed up to accomplish.  This is likely the mission that they
> are currently trying to fulfill by continuing to use ID as bait.
>
> You should notice that developing real intelligent design science is not
> part of the CRSC fellow's mission.  To accomplish this mission the
> fellows have been prevaricating about being able to do the same science
> as everyone else in order to demonstrate the existence of their
> intelligent designer when their mission was to actually undermine a
> basic component of real science.  Science can only work for things that
> we can determine actually exist.  This is not the philosophical
> materialism that the CRSC fellows want to combat, but they lump it in
> with what they do not like.  Science is just the best means that we have
> figured out to understand nature, and it turned out that any ID science
> that they wanted to accomplish would have just demonstrated that nature
> wasn't the Biblical creation described in the Bible.  This is the reason
> why the Top Six presented in the order in which they must have logically
> occurred in this universe killed ID on TO back in Nov. 2017.  The
> Biblical creationists supporting the ID scam on TO could not deal with
> the reality that the Top Six represented.  The designer that filled
> those gaps was not their Biblical designer, and most of them quit
> supporting the ID scam.
>
> Intelligent design was a part of the Wedge strategy to accomplish their
> religious-political mission.
>
> The Wedge document:
> https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
>
> Phillip Johnson has claimed that getting ID taught in the public schools
> was part of the Wedge Strategy to achieve the religious-political goals
> of the Discovery Institute's CRSC Mission Statement.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
>
> QUOTE:
> Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the
> issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God,
> before the academic world and into the schools.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> The wedge strategy details a simultaneous assault on state boards of
> education, state and federal legislatures and on the print and broadcast
> media.[33] The Discovery Institute has carried out the strategy through
> its role in the intelligent design movement, where it aggressively
> promoted ID and its Teach the Controversy campaign to the public,
> education officials and public policymakers.[34] Intelligent design
> proponents, through the Discovery Institute, have employed a number of
> specific political strategies and tactics in their furtherance of their
> goals. These range from attempts at the state level to undermine or
> remove altogether the presence of evolutionary theory from the public
> school classroom, to having the federal government mandate the teaching
> of intelligent design, to 'stacking' municipal, county and state school
> boards with ID proponents.[35]
> END QUOTE:
>
> TO participants that were posting in the 1990's should recall that
> intelligent design first came to our attention as something that the
> anti-evolution Biblical creationists wanted to teach in the public
> schools.  Initially teaching intelligent design was a major part of the
> Teach the Controversy political ploy, but they dropped ID out of their
> Teach the Controversy material after they started running the bait and
> switch. The Teach the Controversy ploy became the switch scam, and
> wasn't supposed to mention that ID had ever existed.  You can just go
> back up to the conclusions of their 1999 public school ID propaganda
> quoted above to note that ID was definitely part of the original Teach
> the Controversy strategy.  The title of the booklet is "Teaching the
> Controversy: Darwinism, Design and the Public School Science
> Curriculum".  By continuing to use ID as bait, they are just continuing
> with their original mission.
>
> When the bait and switch started to go down Johnson retired from his ARN
> ID Blog one month later.  He did not give up on teaching ID in the
> public schools, and he came back to support the Dover effort.  Johnson
> sat in the Federal courtroom every day of testimony.  After that Johnson
> quit supporting teaching ID in the public schools and admitted that the
> ID science had never existed.  The Discovery Institute doubled down
> after Dover and put out their current teach ID propaganda even after
> Phillip Johnson's admission.  The Discovery Institute intelligent design
> Wedge advocates could not give up on using ID as bait.  The obfuscation
> and denial switch scam was their only way forward with their Wedge
> goals, and the creationist ID supporters were not interested in the
> obfuscation and denial switch scam.  They needed to keep using
> Intelligent design as bait to dishonestly garner creationist support for
> their Wedge goals. All the Discovery Institute ID fellows accepted this
> as the way forward in trying to achieve their Wedge goals.  None of the
> fellows at the Discovery Institute have ever protested the bait and
> switch strategy, nor resigned because of it.  Probably most of the
> current fellows that have signed up after Kitzmiller, signed up knowing
> that bait is all they could expect ID to be used for.  None of them have
> ever produced any legitimate ID science nor have they tried to create
> something positive from their "best evidence" for intelligent design.
>
> Phillip Johnson's admissions about intelligent design Spring 2006:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20070609171527/http:/sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles/issue10/evolution.pdf
>
> QUOTE:
> I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design
> at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the
> Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully
> worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s
> comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific
> people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite
> convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is
> ready for competition in the educational world.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> For his part, Johnson agrees: "I think the fat lady has sung for any
> efforts to change the approach in the public schools…the courts are just
> not going to allow it. They never have. The efforts to change things in
> the public schools generate more powerful opposition than accomplish
> anything…I don’t think that means the end of the issue at all."
> END QUOTE:
>
> Even after Johnson made these admissions the Discovery Institute
> continued to use ID as bait:
> https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/
>
> If you download their current edition of this teach ID propaganda (they
> have updated it around every 3 years since producing it after
> Kitzmiller) you will find their Science Education Policy that they put
> up on their web site after Kitzmiller.  It claims that there is a
> legitimate scientific theory of ID to teach in the public schools, but
> they do not want ID "required" to be taught.  In 2013 both Louisiana and
> Texas wanted to use their "Teach the Controversy" switch scam to teach
> ID in their public schools, and both states claimed that they were not
> requiring teaching ID, but were only providing the teachers with the
> means to teach the material if they wanted to.  The Discovery Institute
> ran the bait and switch on both states again, and reminded them that the
> switch scam had nothing to do with ID.  The Discovery Institute removed
> this paragraph from the Science Education policy then up on their web
> page, but you can still find the intact education policy on page 15 of
> their current teach ID propaganda.
>
> QUOTE:
> Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
> the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
> does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
> voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
> the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
> to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
> the scientific debate over design in an objective and
> pedagogically appropriate manner.
> END QUOTE:
>
> They simply deleted this paragraph from their education policy on their
> web site, left the rest intact, and continued to use ID as bait.  Their
> bogus claim of not "requiring" ID to be taught had just been an excuse
> for using ID as the bait and never giving their creationist supporters
> any ID science to teach.
>
> There should be no doubt that the Discovery Institute intelligent design
> advocates have been perpetrating the bait and switch scam on creationist
> ID supporters for over 20 years (since March 2002).
>
> They last updated their teach ID propaganda in 2021, but subsequently
> reformatted the site and seem to have reverted to the 2018 edition.
>
> The Discovery Institute has a new Science Education Policy up where the
> "required" denial returns front and center, so that ID can be used as
> the bait, but the policy is heavily pushing the obfuscation and denial
> switch scam.  They are literally running the bait and switch on the
> rubes with their current education policy.  The rubes have obviously
> come in to get the ID science, but now they are told, obliquely, that
> they do not want to teach the ID science, but there is this nifty
> obfuscation and denial stupidity that they should teach instead.  After
> the bait and switch on both Louisiana and Texas when they were not
> "requiring" ID to be taught, everyone should know that this is just
> their continued efforts to use ID as bait.  They have no intention of
> providing any ID science for anyone to teach in the public schools.
>
> https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
>
> They have not retracted their claims about having the ID science to
> teach in the public schools, and one thing that you will notice is that
> both Louisiana and Texas have had to have the bait and switch run on
> them again after bending over for the switch scam (twice for Louisiana).
>  This means that those two states only adopted the the switch scam as a
> means to keep trying to teach creationism in their public schools.  No
> one likes the switch scam, and all the states mentioned have never
> really implemented it.  Ohio was the only state to not only bend over
> for the switch scam, but actually try to implement it without trying to
> teach creationism, and they dropped the whole deal after Kitzmiller.
> None of the other states mentioned never seemed to have implemented
> their policy changes, at least, they have never put out how a teacher
> was supposed to implement the policies.  No lesson plans, and no
> teaching materials have been provided to get the switch scam obfuscation
> and denial taught.  The creationists really do not want to teach their
> kids enough science for them to understand what they have to deny.
>
> It should be noted that the ID Network quit the ID scam back in 2009.
> Their web site remained dormant until a message appeared that you could
> look for them as COPE.  COPE was their effort to get the switch scam
> taught in the public schools without having ID in the name of their
> organization. COPE was a failure, and I do not recall any instances
> where the ID Network was able to sell anyone the switch scam through
> that organization.  The ID Network is back using ID as bait, and they
> admit that COPE was their effort.  The Biblical creationists were not
> interested in the switch scam, and did not want to teach their kids
> enough science for them to understand what they have to deny if they can
> not tell them why they have to deny the science.
>
> http://intelligentdesignnetwork.org/about/
>
> I can't recall when they founded COPE, but their history claims that it
> was in 2011.  After the COPE efforts failed they fired up the ID Network
> again.
>
> It should be noted that in all the years that the Discovery Institute
> has advocated teaching intelligent design in the public schools they
> have never produced a public school lesson plan demonstrating that they
> had any ID science to teach, how the subject would be taught, what
> materials a teacher could use to teach the subject, and how the students
> would be evaluated on what they should have learned.  Before they
> started running the bait and switch they recommended using "Of Pandas
> and People" to teach intelligent design, but they stopped doing that
> after Kitzmiller for obvious reasons.
>
> The Discovery Institute used to have someone whose job it was to make
> sure that the bait and switch went down on any creationist school boards
> or legislators that wanted to teach the ID science.  That person was
> running the Bait and Switch on the Utah creationists back in Nov. 2017
> when the Discovery Institute was putting out their Top Six best
> evidences for ID.  She left the Discovery Institute, and I don't know if
> they replaced her.
>
> https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/dear-utah-teach-about-the-scientific-controversy-over-evolution-not-about-intelligent-design/
>
> QUOTE:
> SARAH CHAFFEE
> Now a teacher, Sarah Chaffee served as Program Officer in Education and
> Public Policy at Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> Let’s be clear: We think that Utah should not include intelligent design
> in their science standards. Our Science Education Policy states:
>
> As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to
> require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state
> boards of education….
>
> …. Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public
> K-12 schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of
> evolution in curricula. It believes that evolution should be fully and
> completely presented to students, and they should learn more about
> evolutionary theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words,
> evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to
> critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
> END QUOTE:
>
> The Texas and Lousiana examples demonstrates how the Discovery Institute
> is actually using their "requiring" recommendation.
>
> Anyone wonder why she isn't quoting from the their "Educator's Briefing
> Packet" where the Discovery Institute sold the Utah creationists on
> teaching ID in the first place?
>
> From the Briefing Packet, link given previously:
> QUOTE:
> Has ID Been Banned from Public Schools?
>
> No. Science teachers have the right to teach science.
> Since ID is a legitimate scientific theory, it should be
> constitutional to discuss in science classrooms and it
> should not be banned from schools. If a science teacher
> wants to voluntarily discuss ID, she should have the
> academic freedom to do so.
> END QUOTE:
>
> In the Kitzmiller Wiki the Discovery Institute person responsible for
> running the bait and switch at the time that the Dover fiasco hit the
> fan was named as Seth Cooper.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
>
> QUOTE:
> This story made the York newspapers, and Buckingham was telephoned by
> Discovery Institute staff attorney Seth Cooper, whose tasks included
> "communicating with legislators, school board members, teachers, parents
> and students" to "address the topic of ID in a scientifically and
> educationally responsible way" in public schools. He later stated that
> he made the call to "steer the Dover Board away from trying to include
> intelligent design in the classroom or from trying to insert creationism
> into its cirriculum [sic]", an account Buckingham has disputed. Cooper
> sent the book and DVD of Icons of Evolution to Buckingham, who required
> the Dover High School science teachers to watch the DVD. They did not
> take up the opportunity to use it in their classes.
> END QUOTE:
>
> Cooper's job had likely become routine.  The bait and switch had gone
> down dozens of times by the time Dover hit the fan, and it was common
> knowledge that the Discovery Institute was running the bait and switch.
> No one had ever gotten any ID science to teach for 3 years.  It was
> likely that it only took one phone call to make the creationists realize
> that they did not want to teach ID if the guys that sold them the scam
> were telling them not to do it, but Cooper screwed up and did not follow
> up and make sure that the Dover creationists had gotten that message. He
> had run into a group of creationists just as dishonest as the Discovery
> Institute ID fellows, but too ignorant to realize that the ID bait and
> switch scam had come from the Discovery Institute, and that they were
> disregarding the advice of the scam artists who had been selling ID as
> bait to the public.
>
> This reality is never going to change and all of you can look back on
> what the Discovery Institute has been doing since starting to run the
> bait and switch back in March 2002.  By 2002 the ID perps were best
> known for wanting to teach their ID science in the public schools and
> the Wedge document, and Phillip Johnson claimed that getting ID taught
> was part of their Wedge strategy, but when it came time to put up or
> shut up they decided to start running the bait and switch.  They could
> not stop using ID as the bait because most Biblical creationists can't
> stand the obfuscation and denial switch scam if they can't tell the
> students why they have to deny the science.
>
> Jonathan Wells participated in the first bait and switch on the Ohio
> State Board of Education, and part of his job was to write up a report
> on the incident.  This is a WayBack archive of that report.
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20110814145400/http://www.creationists.org/archived-obsolete-pages/2002-03-11-OSBE-wells.html
>
> QUOTE:
> Steve Meyer and I (in consultation with others) had decided ahead of
> time that we would not push for including intelligent design (ID) in the
> state science standards, but would propose instead that the standards
> include language protecting teachers who choose to teach the controversy.
> END QUOTE:
>
> Meyer was not only the director of the CRSC of the Discovery Institute,
> but was one of the chief cheerleaders for teaching ID in the public
> schools, and one of the authors of the booklet that the Thomas More
> lawyer would quote from during the Dover fiasco. Meyer was one of the
> chief salesmen for teaching ID in the public schools at this time.  What
> Wells is telling the other ID fellows is that they made the decision to
> start running the bait and switch instead of teach ID in the public
> schools.  In the report Wells names Minnich and DeWolf as also being
> among the ID fellows that made the decision, but News accounts claimed
> that the President of the Discovery Institute was in attendance with
> half a dozen Discovery Institute staff members. This was a major event
> for the Discovery Institute.  They had finally gained enough public
> notoriety for the Biblical creationists to want to teach their ID
> science in the public schools.  The Discovery Institute fellows decided
> to start running the bait and switch instead of teaching ID.  There is
> no doubt that they understood that they were running the bait and switch
> scam.
>
> Meyer and DeWolf are authors of their teach ID booklet that they would
> give out with their Wedge video before the bait and switch started.
>
> This is the link from above.  The booklet was still available on the
> Discovery Institute web site during the Dover fiasco.  They had not
> stopped selling the teach ID ploy to the public, and they never
> retracted what was written in their Teach the Controversy recommendations.
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58
>
> The Discovery Institute also ran the bait and switch on then Senator
> Santorum. Santorum had allowed Phillip Johnson to draft his addition to
> the "No child left behind" legislation, and it ended up in the appendix
> of the bill, and the Discovery Institute heralded it as support for
> teaching ID in the public schools.  Santorum wrote an editorial before
> the bait and switch went down March 14, 2002.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_Amendment
>
> https://www.arn.org/docs/ohio/washtimes_santorum031402.htm
>
> QUOTE:
> "I hate your opinions, but I would die to defend your right to express
> them." This famous quote by the 18th-century philosopher Voltaire
> applies to the debate currently raging in Ohio. The Board of Education
> is discussing whether to include alternate theories of evolution in the
> classroom. Some board members however, are opposed to Voltaire's defense
> of rational inquiry and intellectual tolerance. They are seeking to
> prohibit different theories other than Darwinism, from being taught to
> students. This threatens freedom of thought and academic excellence.
>
> Today, the Board of Education will discuss a proposal to insert
> "intelligent design" alongside evolution in the state's new teaching
> standards.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> This opposition to intelligent design is surprising since there is an
> increasing body of theoretical and scientific evidence that suggests an
> alternate theory is possible. Research has shown that the odds that even
> one small protein molecule has been created by chance is 1 in a billion.
> Thus, some larger force or intelligence, or what some call agent
> causation, seems like a viable cause for creating information systems
> such as the coding of DNA. A number of scientists contend that alternate
> theories regarding the origins of the human species - including that of
> a greater intelligence - are possible.
>
> Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that
> should be taught in science classes.
> END QUOTE:
>
> QUOTE:
> At the beginning of the year, President Bush signed into law the "No
> Child Left Behind" bill. The new law includes a science education
> provision where Congress states that "where topics are taught that may
> generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum
> should help students to understand the full range of scientific views
> that exist." If the Education Board of Ohio does not include intelligent
> design in the new teaching standards, many students will be denied a
> first-rate science education. Many will be left behind.
> END QUOTE:
>
> Senator Santorum, obviously, did not know that the bait and switch was
> going to go down.  He expected the Discovery Institute to follow through
> with the teach ID Wedge strategy, and the bait and switch obviously was
> run on Santorum as well as the Ohio State school board that day.  The
> sad thing is that the Discovery Institute had to run the bait and switch
> on Santorum again when the Dover fiasco hit the fan in Santorum's home
> state. Santorum initially supported the Dover creationists in teaching
> ID, but when the Discovery Institute started running the bait and
> switch, Santorum flip-flopped on the issue during his reelection
> campaign. As sad as it was Santorum's Republican opponents in the
> primaries questioned Santorum's religious convictions when he stopped
> supporting teaching intelligent design in Dover.  The other Republican
> candidates understood that teaching ID was a religious issue.  Santorum
> lost his bid to be reelected, and when he ran for President he no longer
> supported intelligent design, but claimed to support Biblical creationism.
>
> This is the background history that TO participants need to understand
> as they try to recollect what happened with the ID scam on TO for over 2
> decades.
>
> The Discovery Institute ID perps have been perpetrating the bait and
> switch on their Biblical creationist support base for over 20 years.
> They are still using ID as bait, and have never produced any viable ID
> science nor done anything positive with their "best evidence" for ID.
> They have just kept presenting the bait knowing that, that is all that
> ID will ever be.
>
> The current Teach ID propaganda, originally authored by West and Luskin
> after Kitzmiller, is likely going to be updated again in 2024 (last
> updated in 2021), and Luskin is now associate director of the ID scam
> unit of the Discovery Institute, while West is Managing Director of the
> CSC, and Vice President of the Discovery Institute.  Both authors wanted
> to keep using ID as bait after Kitzmiller.  Using ID as bait was
> institutionalized by the Discovery Institute years before Kitzmiller. No
> ID science has ever been produced, and nothing positive was ever done
> with their "best evidence".  All that they have done with ID is use it
> as bait for over 20 years.  None of the CRSC/CSC fellows have protested
> the bait and switch strategy, and none of them have resigned because of
> it.  More have joined in order to keep using ID as bait.  Can anyone
> demonstrate that fellows like Bechly and Sternberg, who joined in the
> scam after Dover, have ever produced any legitimate ID science or done
> anything positive with the best evidence for ID that the Discovery
> Institute claims to have?  All that ID has been for the Discovery
> Institute for over 20 years is bait to draw in the rubes. The
> obfuscation and denial switch scam is all that they are willing to give
> to the rubes at this time, and they tell the rubes that the switch scam
> has nothing to do with their ID science.
>
> Using ID as bait was not due to the act of some deranged flunky of the
> Discovery Institute.  Meyer was the director of the ID scam unit of the
> Discovery Institute at the time he wrote the booklet that the Thomas
> More Lawyer quoted from, and when West continued to offer up ID as bait
> after Kitzmiller (2007 first edition) he was listed as associate
> director of the ID scam unit, and in the teach ID propaganda his
> credentials were Vice President for Public Policy and Legal Affairs
> Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute.
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20081227132545/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453
>
> By the time West authored the briefing packet for educators, using ID as
> bait had been institutionalized by the Discovery Institute.  No group of
> creationists had ever gotten any ID science to teach from the Discovery
> Institute for half a decade by 2007.
>
> If anyone still wants to remain willfully ignorant of what the ID scam
> has been for the last 2 decades, all they should need to do is to try to
> imagine what things would be like if the Discovery Institute had not
> started running the bait and switch scam.  The Ohio creationist rubes
> would have tried to teach the ID science, then Senator Santorum would
> have been cheering them on, and the ID scam would have been tested in
> the Federal courts years before Dover.  Like the scientific
> creationists, even if the Ohio IDiots had decided not to appeal a
> Federal court loss there would have been other creationist groups in
> other states that would have taken the issue to the Supreme Court, and
> there is no evidence that the decision would have been any different
> than it had been for the scientific creationists.  The Discovery
> Institute's Top Six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments had been used by
> and had failed the scientific creationists in 1987.  There is no reason
> to believe that the IDiots would have done any better with the court
> that existed at the turn of the century.
>
> Phillip Johnson's admissions after Kitzmiller should leave no doubt that
> any honest evaluation would have ended in the failure of the creationist
> ID political ploy.  The other ID perps have understood that fact for
> over 20 years, so all they use ID for is bait.  Kitzmiller would have
> never needed to have happened because the ID scam would have ended years
> before, and ID would not have been useful as bait any longer.  Like the
> Institute for Creation Research the Discovery Institute's ID scam unit
> might still exist, but like the ICR, existing is about all they would be
> doing.  The situation would obviously be worse for them than it is at
> this time, since they currently continue to use ID as bait.
>
> Ron Okimoto
>