Bwa ha ha!

| 81 Comments | 1 TrackBack

Just when you think the ID guys can’t get any sillier and more immature, you see stuff like this. Dembski admits on his blog:

Over at www.overwhelmingevidence.com there is a flash animation featuring Judge Jones spouting inanities (inanities that he actually did write or say). There’s been a design inference made that it’s my voice in the Jones animation. A disgruntled former UD commenter KeithS slowed it down and lowered the pitch. Well, it’s true, it actually is me.

Now I’m wondering if the reason we’ve seen Dembski’s writing output decline is because he is spending all his time designing anti-Judge Jones flash animations. And I’m wondering who did the grunts.

Update: see below the fold.

Dembski apparently didn’t think that someone would be clever enough to figure out whose voice was in the flash animation. But after KeithS did his CSI thing and figured it out (sleuthing worthy of a PTer, I might add), Dembski tried to make the best of an embarrassing situation and posted the above on his blog, and emailed the nervous bravado below to the people in the animation – Ken Miller, Barbara Forrest, Rob Pennock, Laurence Krauss, Genie Scott, Wes Elsberry, Patricia Princehouse, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett – as well as Kevin Padian. Dembski’s email had been forwarded to me, but I had to leave it to the recipients to see if it would be made public. Now the text has been posted at RichardDawkins.net. Here it is:

There’s a Christmas present for you at www.overwhelmingevidence.com

– a flash animation that features each of you prominently (some of you are probably aware of it already). We’re still planning a few enhancements, including getting Eric Rothschild in there and having Judge Jones do the actual voiceovers himself (right now it’s me speeded up though it’s his actual words). In return for the judge doing himself, we’ll drop some of the less flattering sound effects. We would have included Prof. Padian, but the images of him on the internet weren’t of sufficient quality (I’m copying Prof. Padian – if you send me a hi res jpg of yourself, I’m sure we can work you in – you were after all the expert witness at the trial).

Best wishes, Bill Dembski

A genuine scientific revolutionary for sure!

(Hat tip: jeffw)

1 TrackBack

The Year in ID from Stranger Fruit on December 19, 2006 4:09 PM

What a year it has been for the Discovery Institute and the Intelligent Design movement! Below the fold, I detail the advances that ID has made in the short time since Judge Jones delivered his ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover.... Read More

81 Comments

It’s funny, because they don’t actually show or tell why any of the statements are false. It’s the old, if-I-say-it-in-a funny-voice-it-must-be-false agrument, which is supported by the equal time tested agrument of the fart sound. (A side note, the fart sound agrument always works in real life. Next time you someone comes up to you trying to start an agrument, just say nothing and let one rip. You’ll always win.)

Also which side of this debate usually sounds more like a recording than the other. (i.e. A system X is irreducibly complex because we said so hundred and one times.)

Although I must admit their flash animation sucks. At least they could have made the arms stay on the characters as they pulled the cord. Also there attempts at humor are sad. At least they could have called Judge Jones “a big poopoo head,” or claimed that he had cooties. At least that would have elevated the discorse to sophomoric level.

P.S. Where the cord that one must pull on Behe or Dembski to get them to do science?

P.P.S. Which grade should we teach ID in, second or first?

I sit in awe of KeithS, what with Sal’s elipses as well.

Bob

Eponymous Darwin phobic superhero Darkwing Quackski (he has 2 PhD s don’t ya know) with the alter ego of William A. Dembski seems indeed to be giving up writing and moving into multimedia and flashy introductions at the St. Canard school of mallardly voice overs.

For his next trick, expect the paper cutouts of the Darwinian rogues gallery to take on South Park like personas with Quackski and longtime sidekicks Slavering Cadaver and Dave ‘Il Duce’ S. Springer valliantly dispatching them with their shining wit.

Obviously ID is going from post modern to post literate.

I agree with Bob. DI seems to think that repeating some of the best statements Jones made, using a funny voice and fart sounds, somehow helps their cause. It very well might, but it just shows conclusively what we have known all along: DI is operating at a grade-school potty humor level, not a mature, rational, scientific level.

Hehe! That voice scared my dog.

My dogs a pit bull.

Hes a good judge of character.

The whole UD site is little more than pissed off sarcasm. It’s the final weapon of losers who just won’t tap out.

PS Bob, it’s “argument”

Well, at least Dembski admits on Overwhelming Evidence that the humor is directed at adolescents. After all, this is really the targeted audience that he and his IDiots are aiming at. Get ‘em before they can think properly, thus assuring that they never will.

Dembski was chocking his chicken? What?

Now I’m wondering if the reason we’ve seen Dembski’s writing output decline is because he is spending all his time designing anti-Judge Jones flash animations.

I wouldn’t say it’s declined. Producing a smaller volume of utter crap is an improvement!

When I saw the animation the other day and read Dembski’s commentary: “‘The Judge Jones School of Law’ is the brainchild of brilliant professional flash animator (I think of him as the “Rembrandt” of flash animation; for now he will remain anonymous until he sees the fallout from his handiwork) as well as of me and my lovely wife Jana (who came up with the name).” my first thought was, “So you came up with this ‘The Judge Jones School of Law’ idea, and then you paid a professional webdesigner to create this flash animation for you?” Clearly, if Dembski’s voice was used through the animation, he was involved from the very beginning. Based on the immaturity of the whole thing, it reflects badly on Dembski (but, you know, he’s the “Isaac Newton of Information Theory”, despite these adolescent-level games).

So, what was supposed to be funny about it? What I saw was a goofy-eyed guy with a goofy voice who shredded ID arguments.

Good heavens! Do they think those arguments have problems?

I might ask which should we teach in elementary school, Grimm’s ‘fairy tails’ or ‘evolution? Oh, that’s right, we are already teaching the kids about homosexuality so we won’t need evolution, after all.

While you spend your time analyzing the ‘nuances’ of senantics and yuking it up, the fact remains that your evolutionary ‘science’ violates the known laws of thermo, probability theory, physics, information theory, kinetics, and the laws of angular momentum.

Natural selection and its mutations cannot account for the complexity of higher order life forms, hell, it can’t even account for the existence of the tiny machines that Behe has discovered in the human cell. Such mechanisms don’t ‘evolve’ out of your slime pond else the law of entropy has no validity.

All you have is the ‘fanciful’ stories of fools like Steven Gould and Carl Sagan to explain the origins of life. Imaginary scenarios invented to deny the existence of a god, taught as ‘science’ for no other reason than to justify social change.

Evolution is the only ‘court’ protected ‘scientific’ theory in the history of the United states. It is NOT observable, NOT testable and NOT rational.

Other than that what’s holding it back?

So, what was supposed to be funny about it?

Good heavens! Do they think those arguments have problems?

asked and answered (even if the answer was phrased as another question).

Really, why act all surprised? Who hasn’t seen this coming? What with Darwin dolls in a vise and his fantasies of putting his detractors on trial, it’s been obvious that Dembski has been little more than your average paranoid crank.

Honestly though, I don’t see much point wasting any more bandwidth on Dembski’s pathetic last stabs at relevance. His time is past and he knows it. His atom-thin veneer of “scientific respectability” has been scratched beyond repair by the utter shreddings he’s received, and what’s under the surface turns out to be a garden-variety Usenet troll after all.

So just don’t feed him! Focus on the DI’s silly press releases, and public/political issues; issues where some ID types might actually have a chance of having some influence and effect. Dembski’s a has-been; a never-was, even. What was the last major effort he spearheaded, being “science advisor” for Ann Coulter’s latest masterwork? What a joke. He doesn’t even seem to have much cachet even within the debased standards of the ID community.

Allen Williams Wrote:

hell, it can’t even account for the existence of the tiny machines that Behe has discovered in the human cell.

(emphasis added)

As Sheila Brofloski (Kyle’s Mom) would say, “What, what, WHAAAT?”

While you spend your time analyzing the ‘nuances’ of senantics and yuking it up, the fact remains that your evolutionary ‘science’ violates the known laws of thermo, probability theory, physics, information theory, kinetics, and the laws of angular momentum.

Angular momentum? That’s a new one to me. Anyone got the scoop on the origin of this particular bit of nuttery?

Re: comment 150598 by Allen Williams:

evolutionary ‘science’ violates the known laws of thermo, probability theory, physics, information theory, kinetics, and the laws of angular momentum.

Thanks, Allen, for a fine parody of utterances by ignorant but self-admiring nincompoops.

Well, that troll came out of left field. Clearly the Rip Van Winkle of trolls. Where has he been for 20 years?

evolutionary ‘science’ violates the known laws of thermo, probability theory, physics, information theory, kinetics, and the laws of angular momentum. Sure, and an omnipotent designer sticking a home made flagellum on a bacterium’s rear doesn’t violate anything (except the bacterium maybe?).

Oh the irony. :-D

Nurse, nurse! Over here, nurse. Another inmate, er, resident, escaped…

No, “Thank you’ for revealing the only thing you really have to offer, which is snide remarks. It’s only ‘nuttery’ because you’re ignorant of the topic.

It’s the liberal way isn’t it? When you lack anything of substance to say in an argument, you make wise cracks or attack the person presenting the argument. It’s as if your ‘social beliefs’ carried the same weight as known facts.

If any of you had studied physics, you’d have learned that the earth rotates in exactly the opposite direction of other planets in this solar system. So, if evolution is true then none of the known and accepted laws of science can be true, particularly the law of angular momentum.

Your stupidity is not my problem.

Angular momentum? That’s a new one to me. Anyone got the scoop on the origin of this particular bit of nuttery?

Kent Hovind. ‘Nuff said.

Well ‘jeannot’

You seem to accept the fact that people can and are born with a third kidney, double joints, and other physical anomalies.

Why would you have a problem with a ‘whip tail’ capable of over 100,000 RPM?

It’s certainly better evidence of an Intelligent Designer at work than such a device emerging by random selection from your muck pond. Ever seen a 747 evolve out of junk?

“Allen Williams” rants…

All you have is the ‘fanciful’ stories of … to explain the origins of life. Imaginary scenarios invented to deny the existence of a god Evolution is … NOT observable, NOT testable and NOT rational.

Al,

You win. It makes much more sense that we teach kids that man was cooked up one morning in the middle of the bronze age by a bored deity out of clay and spare ribs.

Yup. We can just ignore all those pesky fossils and stuff. Probably put there by the devil anyhow.

Glad you corrected me on the laws of motion, too, Al. Would you believe that I’m a working engineer and I still didn’t realize that every single heat calculation I’ve made in the last 20 years has been wrong. It’s a wonder I still have a job. Gotta go now, I’ve got a lot of stuff to fix.

Allen K Williams Wrote:

If any of you had studied physics, you’d have learned that the earth rotates in exactly the opposite direction of other planets in this solar system. So, if evolution is true then none of the known and accepted laws of science can be true, particularly the law of angular momentum

Hum. Would you mind putting that line of argumentation into standard form?

Let’s see if I can try: 1) There is a law of angular momentum and, as I take it, which has been violated. 2) If evolution is true, then It is not the case that the “known and accepted laws of science can be true” ————– 3) Hence, evolution is not true???

your argument is: 1) A 2) if B then A ———— 3) B ???

Fallacy of affirming the antecedent eh?

If any of you had studied physics, you’d have learned that the earth rotates in exactly the opposite direction of other planets in this solar system. So, if evolution is true then none of the known and accepted laws of science can be true, particularly the law of angular momentum.

I’m fascinated, Al. Since you are obviously skilled in the science of physics, please explain to me how the rotation of the earth disproves the laws of angular momentum.

You don’t have to get all complicated, just sketch it out roughly for me. Couple of equations, that’s all I need to understand your flawless logic, and, of course, to see the error of my ways.

It’s the liberal way isn’t it? When you lack anything of substance to say in an argument, you make wise cracks or attack the person presenting the argument.

you would have only noticed that if you yourself were the target of sarcasm, and deservedly so, based on your current ramblings.

hey, just like “you’re not paranoid if they really are out to get you”, if you yourself actually lack coherence in your arguments, expect the responses to correctly attribute your arguments to insanity.

go figure.

… oh, almost forgot, Allen:

Bwa ha ha!

you did a great job helping us stick to the topic the thread title implies; laughing at idiots.

Allen williams Wrote:

You seem to accept the fact that people can and are born with a third kidney, double joints, and other physical anomalies.

I don’t see you point. Don’t physical anomalies happen sometimes? Do you think it’s how evolution happens?

It’s certainly better evidence of an Intelligent Designer at work than such a device emerging by random selection from your muck pond.

Random selection? Never heard of that.

Ever seen a 747 evolve out of junk?

Nope, and I don’t see how this is relevant to evolution either. I you think it is, you’d better read some biology textbook.

Allen williams Wrote:

You seem to accept the fact that people can and are born with a third kidney, double joints, and other physical anomalies.

I don’t see you point. Don’t physical anomalies happen sometimes? Do you think it’s how evolution happens?

It’s certainly better evidence of an Intelligent Designer at work than such a device emerging by random selection from your muck pond.

Random selection? Never heard of that.

Ever seen a 747 evolve out of junk?

Nope, and I don’t see how this is relevant to evolution either. I you think it is, you’d better read some biology textbook.

That e-mail is very odd, to say the least.

LOL. From Dawkins’s website:

Reponse from Richard Dawkins:

Anybody who resorts to tactics of desperation like this has to be a real loser. Dembski is a loser, and it now looks as though he KNOWS it. My guess is that he will try to take it down when he realizes how foolish it makes him look. Josh, can we can keep a copy, after he tries to remove it from his own website?

UPDATE: Just in case he does take it down, I’ve saved a copy on our server. -Josh

What I don’t understand is, why hasn’t Dembski started the cult already? Why isn’t he getting Salvador and Davetard and Joe G and Casey Luskin to all move to El Plano, wear PJs, and give up their money? He’s already demonstrated that he can get a small number of idiots to say and do anything for him, so why isn’t he strip-mining their bank accounts yet?

I think it is great to finally see the fruits of the $4 million in research that the Discovery Institute has spent on researching Flash animation. Money well spent!

our new crackpot Wrote:

How do you get ‘millions’ of years from a C14 radioactive isotope with a half life of only 30,000 years? Don’t they teach you scientists about the dangers of an infinite regression?

You don’t know much about absolute dating in geology, do you? And at least, get your straw man right. The half life of C14 is 5730 years.

This confirms a long-held belief of mine: that ID promoters have no real sense of humor.

I imagine Bill’s band of followers are roaring with laughter over the fart sounds.

Al, um, sort of argues .…

I wouldn’t believe you’re a working engineer because if you were, you’d realize that Heat and Material Balance calculations don’t depend on whether or not someone rejects the nutty assumptions required to believe in evolution.

Well, gee, that’s a shame. My mother will be so dissapointed to find out I’m a self-deluded failure.

But, well, aren’t you in fact arguing that evolution can’t be true because of all these “heat and Material Balance” calculations?

So, Um, since all this old-school math has always seemed to work for me in the past, I’d appreciate it if you could explain just what the orbit of venus and the rotation of the moon have to do with anything.

I know you’re a busy man, what, with that bridge to maintain and everything, so just a few brief sentences would be fine.

Just start with “Evolution can’t be true because”… and eventually work your way down to the orbit of Venus, or the “law of angular momentum” or wherever you’re going.

Oh, and while we’re on the subject, I think the phrase you’re looking for is “The law of conservation of angular momemtum”.

But you probably knew that already and were just testing us. I just happen to luck out and know that one because, well, I use it on a regular basis.

I am schocked shocked schlocked

How could Dimwitzchi have left out Nick????

It is an outrage!

Fart jokes are the hight of comedic brilliancy. Well, for fourth graders confident in their bowel control. When I give school presentations, the fourth graders love learning about frass and the rest of scientific scatology.

“It’s not a false creationist argument. “

If it’s not false then it can’t be a creationist argument.

I just love the first comment to the animation thread at overwhelmingevidence.com, complaining that ridicule is not a good tactic.

We don’t need that.

They do.

Whoever wrote that does have a point. If it wasn’t for this comic relief through relentless mockery of IDiots, my major intestine would probably leap straight up through my neck and throttle my brain.

This has to be the most pathetic thing I’ve yet seen on the ID side. These guys must be crazy if they think doing this sort of thing is going to win them respect from anyone. And what’s more the dweebs at Uncommon Descent have defended it!

On a side note: I cannot believe that Allen Williams is for real. If there’s any evidence to the contrary please let me know - but surely nobody can be this ignorant. *Third* law of thermodynamics? He’s having us on… isn’t he… ?

“Blackcat …you are confusing the words “too” and “two” .… If you are gonna lecture a creationist, please use the correct English words.

Otherwise, your credibility is compromised.”

Now just imagine how his credibility would be compromised if he posted an audio example of his flatulents along with that reply and then claimed he was trying to impress young adults.

I thought it was pretty funny to watch the South Park episode with Richard Dawkins (and I’m a major Dawkins admirer). But Dembski needs some lessons. The guy has no cred as a puppeteer or animator and his attempt is lackluster at best. He should have had Behe show up in a Carnac hat reading his own statements from the stand. Sad.

“If any of you had studied physics, you’d have learned that the earth rotates in exactly the opposite direction of other planets in this solar system.”

Where do people come up with this crazy stuff?!

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/a[…]980225a.html

“4. All the planets revolve in the same general direction, with Pluto’s orbit being the most inclined (17 degrees). Their axes of rotation are more diverse, Uranus and Pluto rotate ‘on their sides’ and Venus’s axis points towards the South.”

Ed writes

“If any of you had studied physics, you’d have learned that the earth rotates in exactly the opposite direction of other planets in this solar system.”

Where do people come up with this crazy stuff?!

Better yet, even if it were true, what possible connection would it have to evolution?!

All this silliness seems to have triggered an amusing email dumping war between Dembski and Dawkins. Dembski apparently thought he was quite poweful in 2004 (and not just in an olfactory sense):

http://richarddawkins.net/articleCo[…]ge2#comments

Dawkins: “Poor loser Demski, such delusions of grandeur, and now he has nothing better to do with his time than make farting noises over the Internet.”

All, it takes is a single failure to disprove a mathematical theorm

Uh, no, a mathematical theorem is true by definition and therefore cannot be disproved. Perhaps you mean that a single counterexample is sufficient to disprove a universally quantified assertion, such as “for all x, F(x)”.

so why is evolution different?

Uh, because “evolution” is not a universally quantified assertion? Perhaps you mean the theory of common descent, rather than “evolution”. Well, what “single failure” do you have in mind? And if we do discover a failure, then we’ll switch to a theory of multiple descent, which still won’t invalidate “evolution”, which is known to occur. When mathematicians discovered that the fifth Fermat number contradicted Fermat’s conjecture that all Fermat numbers are prime, they didn’t discard Number Theory and replace it with “goddidit”.

but surely nobody can be this ignorant

You must not get out much.

He’s having us on… isn’t he… ?

It’s a distinct possibility. If so, then some of his stuff is very funny … it’s like he’s the equivalent of Richard Sheridan’s Mrs. Malaprop, but in regard to scientific concepts.

It seems that our Mr. Williams is an engineer for “Mid America Construction”, living in Overland Park, Kansas. I wonder if he attended the same engineering school as Larry Fafarman.

ROB Wrote:

That e-mail is very odd, to say the least.

Wow. It is really a takedown of another troll when the king of misdirected one-liners gets one right.

Making as much sense, s[limy]cordova has raised the ghost of Haldane’s dilemma over the new data on gene copy numbers in humans and chimps on Unbecoming Flatulence. As if duplications and substitutions were interchangeable, and an assumed discrepancy of 10^4 gets much worse if it would be multiplied with a mere 3. ( http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB121.html )

The divine wind must have poisoned the few remaining brain cells of the creationists. Now we wait for the putrification smell.

Bwa ha ha!

I have closed this thread and deleted a bunch of comments from what are, apparently, spambots with clinical depression.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Nick Matzke published on December 16, 2006 11:24 AM.

Lame Ducks Weigh In was the previous entry in this blog.

Dembski as the David Seville of Information Theory 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