More Dembski delusions

| 163 Comments | 2 TrackBacks

Update: An attendee of the Cal Defend Science event chastises Dembski and his fan Samuel Chen; Dembski posts a correction where Dembski’s anonymous source from Kansas somehow innocently got Padian confused with an entirely different person; Dembski’s blog hits a new low with a KKK cartoon posted by DaveScot.

Those of you who enjoy following the erratic goings-on over at Dembski’s blog may have noticed that yesterday he accused NCSE president Kevin Padian of being a racist. As usual it is being copied by other wingnut blogs, and probably will appear on WorldNetDaily within 24 hours. We have been trying to figure out what combination of garbled sources Dembski was relying on for that post, but it seems to be so distant from actual events it is impossible to untangle. Anyhow, here is a little reality to balance things out:

Dembski says,

In two recent “defend science” talks, one at Cal Berkeley and the other at Kansas University, Padian singled out an Asian-American church that supports ID. In March, Berkeley’s IDEA Club sponsored two talks that I gave to packed houses on the Berkeley campus (go here). Some of the key members in that IDEA Club are also members of this church. Padian now explicitly names this church (Berkland Baptist Church) in his public talks and describes the members of the church that attended my lectures as “young,” “Asian,” and “fundamentalist,” and that this is “what we are up against today.”

There are only a few problems with this:

1. According to KU’s events calendar, there has been no meeting of the “Defend Science” group at the University of Kansas, and as far as I know, there has been no Defend Science meeting anywhere in Kansas.

2. The last evolution/creationism events on KU’s calendar are the events in late January/early February at which NCSE, Kansas Citizens for Science (KCFS), and various lawyers involved in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case spoke about the case and the implications for science standards in Kansas and elsewhere. Also, the main event on Jan. 30 was put together by KCFS, and was not associated in any way with Defend Science.

3. Late January is long before Dembski’s mid-March talks at Berkeley.

4. Kevin Padian was initially going to speak at the January Kansas event, but had to back out.

5. As far as anyone around the NCSE office can recall (Padian is president of NCSE’s board and is not regularly in the NCSE office), Padian hasn’t even been in Kansas for years.

6. Regarding the Berkeley “Defend Science” event, reports indicate that Berkland Baptist Church was not a subject of Padian’s discussion at all. I only found out about the existence of Berkland myself when Dembski mentioned it on his blog.

(Note: ‘Berkland’ is derived from Berkeley + Oakland. According to its website FAQ, the church is officially part of the Southern Baptist Convention, and is “mostly Asian American, but growing increasingly multi-ethnic.” Googling for Dembski shows that Berkland has an extensive photo essay of Dembski’s visit, apparently including some events at the church – I was only aware of Dembski’s talks at Berkeley until I saw this. But apparently Berkland hosted Dembski, perhaps this is where Dembski got the idea that Padian was talking about Berkland.)

7. At the Berkeley Defend Science panel in April, Padian did note that Dembski’s audience had been much larger than the Defend Science event, and had been predominantly asian-american and fundamentalist. Having personally attended Dembski’s lectures, I can confirm that the audience was probably 80%+ people of asian ancestry, and not all Berkeley students – the audience included folks from around the Bay Area, and from people I talked to at the event I gathered it had been publicized in local churches. The only time I’ve ever seen something similar was when Kent Hovind came to speak at Cal a few years back.

8. As you might be able to predict from Dembski’s performance with the above simple facts, he is also wrong about what Padian said. Padian didn’t say anything derogatory about people of asian ancestry. Padian’s point was simple: the audience that science educators and science fans need to reach in the future was not the audience at the Defend Science meeting, rather it was the audience of Dembski’s talk.

If Dembski wishes to regain any semblance of the decency he lost in the Pianka affair, the Shallit affair, the single-malt scotch affair, etc., he should apologize to Padian and retract his insulting claims. But based on those past experiences, I won’t hold my breath.

2 TrackBacks

DaveScot, the lunatic who rants at Dembski's blog, has just posted an appalling complaint. He's been falsely sliming Kevin Padian as a racist, and now he's attacking Padian because he thinks the religious fanatics who kill abortion doctors are contempt... Read More

Uncommon Descent and a Bad Report from Threads from Henry's Web on June 14, 2006 6:02 PM

I earlier commented (Christians and Defamation) on the behavior of the folks over at Uncommon Descent in their treatment of Eric Pianka. I still regard what was done as completely contrary to Christian principles. Nothing that developed in that story... Read More

163 Comments

Number of non-white associates at ICR . … . zero.

Number of nonwhite associates at AiG . … . zero.

Number of non-white Fellows of the Center for (The Renewal of) Science and Culture . … . zero.

Hmmmmmm . … . … anyone see a pattern here . … ?

Indeed, the thread where we watch Dembski’s blog and laugh is the most popular thread at After the Bar Closes, by a country mile.

William Dembski’s introduction to “What Darwin Didn’t Know” (2004), “Why then,does Darwinism continue to garner such a huge following, especially among the intellectual elites? Two reasons: 1) It provides a materialistic creation story that dispenses with and need fpr design or God (This is very convenient for those who want to escape the demands of religion, morality, and conscience).”

So see? Just embrace non-materialism and then you can be forgiven all your lies, and once forgiven you can lie and lie and lie.…

As presented by Billy Dembski, I might have thought that there was something afoot here, but, according to the Berkland Baptist Church’s own website, the “congregation” is primarily Asian, apparently mostly Korean, http://www.berkland.org/berkeley/ From Berkland Baptist Church’s Webpage:. “BBC ministers to Asian-American college students, graduate students and young adults” and “ The vibrant, mostly Asian-American church exists primarily to minister to students … according to its founder and first pastor Paul Kim.”

Berkland is an Asian American church according to http://www.xanga.com/groups/group.aspx?id=256897 , a “ Berkland xanga blogring” So, we have young…Asian…Christians, some of whom are fundamentalists.

I noticed that when Billy Dembski was asked directly on his blog if he thought Padian was a racist, he didn’t respond. This makes sense, since that would be legally actionable, and Dembski’s silence speaks far more eloquently about how low the scumbag has sunk. He can’t convince any reputable scientists of his claims, he can’t manage to ooze his slimy stench on over to Dover to testify, but boy can he try to smear a person indirectly.

I’d be willing to bet money Billy got his ass kicked regularly as a kid and this forum of his provides him an outlet for that past pain. Okay, it’s a good thing that Billy Dembski is nearly always wrong, but for him and his utterly worthless group of lickspittle toadies to post up Padian’s phone number…well. That just speaks of how low these weasels are.

It boggles my mind how, after abandoning christianity (thanks in large part to creationists, I might add), I find myself drawn even more strongly to the concept of evil–and men like Dembski are the reason. Thanks, Billy, for reminding me just how morally bankrupt religionists like you truly are.

Sounder, I couldn’t agree more.

It’s been my experience that those who are most immoral are the most vocal about others’ immorality. I think this is just another example of what an upstanding, God fearing Christian Billy D truly is.

What a great insight into the true compulsive lying habits (er…I meant morality)of Bill Dembski and friends.

In March, Berkeley’s IDEA Club sponsored two talks that I gave to packed houses on the Berkeley campus (go here)

were these the talks where Dembski claimed to have given testimony in the kitzmiller case?

*sigh*

(Note: ‘Berkland’ is derived from Berkeley + Oakland

hmm. I lived in both places, and trying to combine the two into a conglomerate makes about as much sense as

“Los Angelisco”

unless things have changed drastically in the last 10 years or so, Oakland and Berkeley are quite different cities indeed.

It makes me sick. Don’t the have a rule/law of “no false witness/testimony” ???

Not if you’re LFG* apparently.

*Lying For JesusTM

hmm. I lived in both places, and trying to combine the two into a conglomerate makes about as much sense as

“Los Angelisco”

You’re right, that just doesn’t sound right.

San Frangeles flows better.

I am the person who went along (foolishly) with what William Dembsky said at his Uncommon Descent Blog and agreed that what was presented there sounded racist to me. I was wrong and wish to publicly say so, as is only right and honorable.

However, I have, over the past two days, attempted three times to post a comment at Uncommon Descent and have grown to believe that dissent is the only uncommon thing there, since each time it has remained unposted. I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions. Here is my post that I intended to leave there for public viewing and have been essentially forced to post here ——————-

Dr. Dembski: This represents the third time I have asked to have my comment posted. If it does not appear, I can only assume that you or your moderator has chosen to deliberately omit it, a proposition I find troubling and unethical, since my comment is not insulting or deprecatory to *anyone*. The post is as follows: After viewing the responses to Dr. Dembski’s assertions on “The Panda’s Thumb,” and some sleuthing on my own, I am going to retract any claims –on *my* part –of racism against Kevin Padian. It appears that the Berkland church groups are mostly Asian and were not singled out unfairly, merely to note that they are the kind of audiences Neo-Darwinians would like to reach.

It appears to me as though Dr. Dembski is misinformed because there are some serious discrepancies between what Dr. Dembski has posted here and what is claimed by both the NCSE ( personal communication) and a female (Christian) colleague of mine who attended Padian’s talk. Perhaps you can clarify these points, Dr. Dembski, and the points posted at “Panda’s Thumb” on the dating of your claims. What Padian said was not “racist” anymore than it is “racist” to say that there are a large number of European hockey players in the NHL who might be good spokesmen for Christianity. To mention the geographic origins of any group is not *inherently* “racist.”

To try to smear a man as a racist without good cause is, however, inherently unethical, (which I am sure you would agree with) and to deny the right of a dissenter (me) from having a NON-INSULTING disagreement with your point of view is frankly disturbing. If one claims to be an ethical and moral human being, then one has to walk the walk and not merely mouth the words. And if it is in fact DaveScot censoring this post, I would have thought the Marines taught men the meaning of honor.

End post———————————————————

I have placed this here because of the apparent refusal of Mr. Dembski or DaveScot to post this in their forum. I have done so to apologize to Padian and to point out my personal disagreement with the manner in which Mr. Dembski “runs” his blog.

Apparently, there is a strong tradition of censoring comments at the UD blog. Anything that might usurp their perceived authority is not allowed.

Mr JPadilla, your post is to be commended. It is the mark courage to admit, in front of an audience, that he/she was mistaken about something.

Sadly, as you have noticed, Dembski and his blog cronies are unable to make similar admissions. Nor are they able to handle the criticism of others (who may otherwise be sympathetic to their cause). What you have experienced is nothing new. I have heard of countless similar stories of comments being removed and commenters being banned.

Andrew

Earlier this year I counted up all the comments on Uncommonly Dense and Panda’s Thumb for an entire month. PT posts got something like 40 comments on average, while UD posts got around 8. Mr. Padilla here is a case study in why this is so. Who would consistently put effort into commenting if they were very likely to be deleted by some tinpot censor? IIRC, we even found that the discussion thread at AtBC where we mock UD, got more comments per time than the whole of UD.

It should be noted that while Uncommonly Dense deleted Padilla’s comments, they left ones like this up:

Here is Kevin Padian’s phone number 510-524-3456 and his office number @ (510) 642-7434. Since he is so open with criticizing individuals, he must be open to his own personal and individualized criticism from others. We should all let him know how much of a racist he is.

Comment by blooooger — May 9, 2006 @ 2:52 pm

From ombudsman:

Dembski corrected the statement about the KU talk. It was not Padian but someone who went in Padian’s place.

Wait, let me make sure I’ve got this absolutely straight: Dembski is claiming that Padian is a racist based on a single comment that Padian himself did not say?

ombudsman, do you think there’s a chance the good doctor will provide us with, you know, the actual sentence this “racist” remark was made in? Because, well, quoting, not a paragraph, not a single phrase, but three independent words out of their context is just about as lame as quote-mining can get. What do you say?

Nick “Denzel” Matzke said:

7. At the Berkeley Defend Science panel in April, Padian did note that Dembski’s audience had been much larger than the Defend Science event, and had been predominantly asian-american and fundamentalist. Having personally attended Dembski’s lectures, I can confirm that the audience was probably 80%+ people of asian ancestry, and not all Berkeley students — the audience included folks from around the Bay Area, and from people I talked to at the event I gathered it had been publicized in local churches. The only time I’ve ever seen something similar was when Kent Hovind came to speak at Cal a few years back.

Omtardsman said:

Comment #100377

Posted by ombudsman on May 11, 2006 09:00 AM (e) | kill … Point 7 is an admission that the racially loaded term was indeed used in the talks.

Asian-American is a ‘racially loaded term’? LOL okay.

Oops. Evolutionists got caught at KU after all. Who’da thunk it.

Most interesting post, ombudsman. Thanks!

FL

Having read the Dembski entry, I cant see anything about it that makes anyone out to be racist, so I cant understand what “Ombudsman” is on about.

After all, is it so wrong to say that someone is an enemy of science if they support ID, something religiously based with no scientific merit at all?

Sir_Toejam Wrote:

hmm. I lived in both places, and trying to combine the two into a conglomerate makes about as much sense as

“Los Angelisco”

unless things have changed drastically in the last 10 years or so, Oakland and Berkeley are quite different cities indeed.

They’re not all that different. The Rockridge area is shared by both, as is the upscale residential band in the hills and the depressed band in the flats. South Berkeley isn’t quite as bad as East Oakland, but other than that you can easily move between the cities without noticing.

For the record - I was another who attempted to post on Uncommon Descent on this subject. I foolishly did not keep the exact text but it was to point out that the accusation was based on what one anonymous person told another anonymous person who then told Dembski and that at least one person in this chain made an error (since admitted and corrected).

In view of the threats to Judge Jones it does seem that this gossip mongering could have serious results one day.

I also think JPadilla did very well. What a good idea to repeat rejected Uncommon Descent comments here. Maybe this is the beginning of a new concept - the shadow blog for rejected comments.

ombudsman Wrote:

The fact remains that Padian and others in the Defend Science group are describing who the enemies of science are using a racial adjective. It’s even worse that it wasn’t Padian but rather a colleague who delivered the talk at KU. Now instead of just one bad apple singling out enemies of science by race it’s an institution that’s doing it.

Let’s see here.

1) Bill Dembski conquered much of Asia, murdering thousands of people and looting their valuables.

2) No, wait, that was Genghis Khan.

3) Even worse! That means Dembski and Khan represent an institution of brutal conquerors.

Point 7 is an admission that the racially loaded term was indeed used in the talks.

The term “Asian” is “racially loaded?” So Padian isn’t supposed to admit the existence of Asians? That would make it kind of hard for his Asian grad students to work with him, wouldn’t it?

Do you know anything about the student demographics at Berkeley? Accusing a popular Berkeley professor in the life sciences of making public racist comments about Asians is approximately as plausible as claiming that a popular Brigham Young professor hates white people. This would be an unfounded smear as applied to pretty much anybody, but against Padian it’s a really really funny unfounded smear.

The fact remains that Padian and others in the Defend Science group are describing who the enemies of science are using a racial adjective. It’s even worse that it wasn’t Padian but rather a colleague who delivered the talk at KU. Now instead of just one bad apple singling out enemies of science by race it’s an institution that’s doing it.

Given that I’m Asian American AND that I’m a community activist, I REALLY RESENT IT when asshats like you try to speak for me.

You trying to say that you know better than I do what is or is not racist about me?

Sounds like you’re pointing the racism in the wrong direction, son.…

Mark and Padilla - Yes, well said.

“I also think JPadilla did very well. What a good idea to repeat rejected Uncommon Descent comments here. Maybe this is the beginning of a new concept - the shadow blog for rejected comments.”

However, Mark, there could be a problem - PT might have to double the size of the band-width to handle all the banned comments!

Once again, the weasels at Uncommon Declivity provide me with mirth for my morning meal.

According to “Ombudsman,” saying “young” and “asian” and “fundamentalists” (in that order?)now equates to “enemies of science” (as if that was ever actually said at all or even implied).

Can you dig deeper into that bin of lies you gather your claims from, Ombudsman? Wait! Billy Dembski already has! In his “explanation” of why he was wrong, he creatively interprets those three words to mean that this relatively minor church is “pervasive” and “large” and “making it harder to teach” ( Although Padian didn’t exactly say that either, eh, Billy?).

Why, no, not even Billy’s “informant” says that at all, merely that Padian remarked that his lecture attendees and billy’s audience were “were different”… because the latter’s were ‘young,’ ‘Asian,’ and ‘fundamentalist.’

Billy further omits that this remark’s CONTEXT was one in which Padian did not call anyone an “enemy of science” but merely one that has to be reached out TO, because they are who attended Billy’s lecture.

As to Dembski’s CLAIM that Padian explicitly stated “this is who we are up against,” can Billy or Billy’s (invisible friend?) informant please provide evidence that this was in fact stated?

I for one see no reason to believe that this is true either, until I see some documentation, since Billy (or Billy’s invisible informant) has already admitted to error and Billy has been quite creative in “interpreting” things that were NOT said. Billy has been caught lying his pasty (oops, is that “racist” too?)ass off far too many times for me to take him at his tainted word.

I also think JPadilla did very well. What a good idea to repeat rejected Uncommon Descent comments here. Maybe this is the beginning of a new concept - the shadow blog for rejected comments.

I think the Uncommonly Dense thread at AtBC is doing a good job with exactly this. Plus the crunchy and delicious bonus that this one single discussion board thread about the idiocy of UD gets twice the traffic that UD itself does.

JPadilla, what you did was indeed honorable and thanks for posting about it here. It appears your attempt to do what is right has resulted in you becoming a non-person at Dembski’s blog. Such is often the case for those who are honest or think for themselves there.

You’re welcome to post here or the After the Bar Closes forum.

Cheers and welcome!

Chris

Once again, DaveScot has seen fit to censor my posts at Uncommon Dissent, so I am forced to post my views in other forums. Like here. This is the post I attempted to make at Uncommon Dissent:

DaveScot says: “Suicide bombers kill/wound as many as possible, they don’t know who the victims are, they don’t care whether the victims have done anything wrong (perceived or real), and in their indiscrete targeting even kill people of their own creed.” You must mean “terrorists” DaveScot, not all suicide bombers. Suicide bombing is a monthly event in places like Iraq, where the relevant distinction between suicide bombers that attack military and civilian targets is clear:

1. Suicide bombing against military targets is classified by Military Historians as a form of armed violence in assymetric warfare. 2. Suicide bombing against indiscriminate or chosen civilian targets is called terrorism. Even though you claim to have been a Marine, I’m not surprised you didn’t know that, DaveScot. Your ignorance on multitudes of subjects – as well as your hypocrisy – seems unlimited. Quote: Islam is a cancer growing on the planet. It needs to be killed not accomodated. It’s an ugly, dysfunctional belief system even in milder forms, that subjugates the female half of the population. However, since we can’t just kill them all (we can kill the worst offenders though) we have to put a more attractive alternative in place… It won’t go down without a fight so there must be some bloodshed before it’s a closed chapter in history. Comment by DaveScot - November 5, 2005 @ 6:01 am

Don’t bother making excuses for this, DaveScot. I know you can, but why bother? Your accusations are amazingly hypocritical. Yes, I know you claim to have said this due to Islam’s alleged “subjugation” of women due to their inability to vote. You’ll conveniently forget that women in the United states only got the right to vote less than 90 years ago (1920). You’ll conveniently forget that women in Islam do have the right to vote in many democratic and even monarchical Islamic states. You’ll forget that women in the U.S. recieve unequal pay for equal work to this day.

But that’s not the point, is it, Dave? The point is that you, as a petty tyrant, have a minor position of power and brook no dissent from your simpleminded claims. And, as an innately status-concious, insecure, simple-minded “tough guy,” you won’t have the ethics neccessary to post this. That is pretty funny

My Point is quite simple,DaveScot, and I know you read the posts here: You excoriate Kevin Padian (again, wrongly) for saying that religious fundamentalist fanatacism that leads to murder…is wrong.

You then take that simple idea and twist it to mean that Kevin Padian somehow hates all fundamentalists and lumps all killers together unfairly, according to your erroneous redefinitions of what a suicide bomber is. As I noted, SOME suicide bombings are considered legitimate military actions when directed against military targets. But you say :

“If Padian can’t tell the difference between a mass murdering suicide bomber indiscriminately blowing up crowds of people and a gunman carefully selecting a single target for murder then Padian simply isn’t playing with a full deck and one has to hope he never decides to murder anyone because he isn’t able to distinguish between killing a crowd of strangers and a single person against whom he holds a grudge.”

Let’s be quite honest, DaveScot: from what I have read at Uncommon Descent and other forums, your only interest in attacking Kevin Padian is not because he is a “racist” or that he “hates fundamentalism” because he said no such things. What you hate is that Kevin Padian testified in the Kitzmiller case, so you have embarked on what one writer at Panda’s Thumb has called a “SwiftBoat” campaign.

You rail at Padian for trumped-up claims that he NEVER said and then excuse your own murderous statements about killing Muslims. This is hypocrisy. You fail to allow others to point out your errors. This is called hubris. Here is what I really think, DaveScot – a person here, in the “After the Bar Closes” section analyzed you to what I think is a tee: You are at best a mediocre mind that was able to get in on the ground floor of a company which took off. But it was not due to your innate mental abilities–you don’t *really* know math, or stats or information theory, or genetics, or much of anything. It was simply luck. You have an overweening sense of your own self-importance however, and now seek the attention of others via your imagined mental abilities, but you fail in direct debate and exchange of ideas. So you used troll tactics at “Darwinist” sites until you got the attention of William Dembsky, who used what little computer skills you have to appoint you “gatekeeper” and you now feel all filled with self-importance, but still cannot manage a coherent supported debate.

So what is left for you but to pose and preen and attack people like Padian dishonestly and hypocritically while disallowing any disagreement…while others laugh at your inanity and point out your errors and fallacies and utter lies by the boatload at places like…here.

I will vote with my feet. In Mark 6:11 says that when one is not welcome or unheard, “shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them.” I believe I’ll do just that.

JFWANG Wrote:

But if you think anybody would put church activities (unless it’s unitarian) on their resume for grad school, you must be mistaken.

I sit on the University of Washington’s Graduate Admissions Committee for the Department of Biochemistry. You are simply wrong.

I would estimate that about one third of the several dozen applications that I reviewed this year included mention of work done in church-sponsored activities, religious studies, or missionary work. These items (like athletics) neither add to nor detract from an applicant’s chances for acceptance. They are, generally speaking, not relevant.

We are interested in one question: does a given applicant appear to have the talent, background, and motivation to do well as a graduate student in biochemistry? A student’s religion, or aptitude as a squash player or linebacker, is irrelevant*.

That you think we would bother to even consider religion indicates that JFWANG has no concept at all of what science, and science education, are about.

* Note: I am inclined to give extra weight to students who are excellent cooks. These students have skills directly relevant to biochemistry bench work, and they tend to bring tasty items to lab meetings and parties.

Alexey Merz Wrote:

I would estimate that about one third of the several dozen applications that I reviewed this year included mention of work done in church-sponsored activities, religious studies, or missionary work. These items (like athletics) neither add to nor detract from an applicant’s chances for acceptance.

That’s because you don’t have the green beard gene.

Dr. Merz advises interested prospective graduate students:

* Note: I am inclined to give extra weight to students who are excellent cooks. These students have skills directly relevant to biochemistry bench work, and they tend to bring tasty items to lab meetings and parties.

Ammonium sulfate does not add to the flavor during protein purification and dialysis does not restore the original flavor. In fact, purifying to homogeneity does not increase the flavor one bit, although this may be a function of the protein. Beta mercaptoethanol is definitely not a flavor enhancer and drives away all the dinner guests. Instead of slaving over a hot stove, you end up standing in a cold room which can be good or bad depending on where you were raised.

On the plus side, if you work with the right kind of organism you can bring tasty treats to parties.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Does anyone notice that DaveScot is doing us all a service by debunking (time and time again on Dembski’s blog), the notion that ID isn’t about religion?

Shalini Wrote:

Does anyone notice that DaveScot is doing us all a service by debunking (time and time again on Dembski’s blog), the notion that ID isn’t about religion?

He that troubleth his own house is probably a blogger

Now that there is an apology on the table, I should note an earlier comment on an ID advocate admitting error:

Is a willingness to correct error a virtue? No, it is simply a minimum standard for participation in argumentation. Implying that we should be impressed that someone corrects errors that others have pointed out is like saying that a child caught with hand in cookie jar should be rewarded for the simple act of removing his hand when caught. It is only by comparison to the astoundingly bad record of antievolutionists in general in correcting their misinformation that Casey Luskin could appear virtuous in this regard.

(Source)

The same goes for others.

My life’s been pretty dull recently. Shrug. My mind is like a void. I haven’t gotten anything done lately. I can’t be bothered with anything recently.

I’ve just been staying at home waiting for something to happen, but I don’t care. Basically nothing seems worth thinking about. I can’t be bothered with anything recently.

I haven’t been up to much lately. I’ve basically been doing nothing , but it’s not important. I can’t be bothered with anything recently. I’ve just been letting everything happen without me lately.

I haven’t been up to much today. I’ve just been letting everything happen without me. Basically nothing seems worth bothering with. I’ve just been hanging out doing nothing. I just don’t have anything to say right now. More or less nothing happening.

I’ve just been staying at home not getting anything done. I guess it doesn’t bother me. Shrug. I haven’t been up to anything. I haven’t gotten much done today.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Nick Matzke published on May 9, 2006 4:46 PM.

I.D. Rigs Its Own Trial was the previous entry in this blog.

A “Little Knowledge” About Mootness is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter