More DI Word Games

| 235 Comments

by Mark Farmer, http://www.uga.edu/cellbio/people/farmer.html

Intelligent Design Creationism has evolved yet again. In preparing for a discussion last month (May) with Charles Thaxton I went to the DI’s site to see what their definition of ID was. What I found was this:

Intelligent design is a scientific theory which holds that certain features of the universe and living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, and are not the result of an undirected, chance-based process such as Darwinian evolution.

OK so what does the same site say today, a month later?

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Notice the two important differences? 1) Apparently ID is no longer a “scientific theory” instead it now refers to “a scientific research program” and 2) ID is no longer contrasted with “chance-based process such as Darwinian evolution.” but rather is now compared to “an undirected process such as natural selection.”

It makes one wonder whether this is simply the natural evolution of ID as it continually adapts to an ever changing environment or whether recent court defeats, rejections by state school boards, and continued lack of intellectual advancement have brought about their own form of punctuated equilibria for intelligent design.

235 Comments

I suspect the DI, the ICR, and AiG are all headed for the same shtick; flood the market with bullshit and call it “peer-reviewed” research.

But they are just digging themselves in deeper and deeper. They have so much crap out there in public now that they can’t take it back.

And most satisfying about this easily available crap is that, if any state ever passes a law requiring equal treatment of ID along with real science, it would be easy to make up a comparison chart that shows the misconceptions promulgated by ID/creationism for over 40 years against the real concepts in science.

I could even make up a lesson plan showing how specific concepts in science work in the lab and field, and how the ID/creationist distortions of those concepts blow up and go nowhere.

Then I would add the comparisons between scientific activity and pseudo-scientific activity.

And since a little history of science is useful to show how ideas came about, we can add the court history (there is no research history) of ID/creationism all the way up through Dover as well. This would show how ID/creationist ideas morphed to get around defeats in court.

This could be quite fun. I suspect by the time the teaching community polished their lesson plans and the national scientific and teaching organizations got done with it, the ID/creationists would be screaming for laws protecting them from exposure of their pseudo-science.

Wouldn’t that be a nice court battle?

Unless this country gets to the point where it starts implementing the equivalent of Deutsche Physik or Lycenkoism, ID/creationist pseudo-science doesn’t stand a chance.

As far as I can tell, the definitions are the same. A “scientific theory” should also refer to a research program to back it up.

They probably took some heat for calling evolution a “chance-based” process; hence the term “undirected” to say they support teleology over the real world.

Intelligent Design is a research program??

First of all, that makes no grammatical or logical sense. It’s like saying “Love is warm cookie.”

Second, where exactly is this ‘research program’? To quote the great swordsman, “You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.”

I agree with Mike, let’s set up those lesson plans and mail them to every science department head of a high school in the country… heck, if the creationists can mail out crap to every, then we can at least mail out the truth to them.

GuessWho said:

As far as I can tell, the definitions are the same. A “scientific theory” should also refer to a research program to back it up.

They probably took some heat for calling evolution a “chance-based” process; hence the term “undirected” to say they support teleology over the real world.

That’s an interesting observation.

It suggests that they are beginning to figure out that their thermodynamics is wrong. There have already been a few admonitions by creationists to stop using thermodynamic arguments.

But I think this is the first evidence that they may be aware that their underlying concepts about how the universe works may need some stealthy morphing.

But they still have all that crap out there. And a few of their papers got past the reviewers in a couple of journals. That means the misconceptions are out there forever.

I have never seen an ID/creationist retract anything. They just slowly morph a little and leave the junk hanging out there for rubes to pick.

I don’t think that the DI would ever correct anything that was wrong. My feeling is that they are seeing the success of the Biologos group. I think that they want to widen the tent to try and attract TEs by not saying that they are against evolution, they just think it was directed.

I guess they must have thought “Darwinian evolution” sounded too stupid. But I presume they still can’t help from being stupid since they left the “undirected” part in there. If they replace the “undirected” part with something more intelligent, then they wouldn’t look so stupid anymore. But then it would be even a bigger lie if they did that though.

It’s an inverse relationship. The more stupid is in there, the less lies are in there. But the less stupid is in there, then the more lies are in there. They have to walk a fine line, I guess. It’s a fine line between lies and stupid.

MichaelJ, they may be trying to widen the tent to include TE, but their own schisim is having none of it; as if a new religion would tolerate blasphemers.

JohnnyB (whoever the hell that moniker covers) has a rant over at UD, “A Convergence Between Biologos and the Intellijunt Design Movement”7th July 2010, (duly attacked by ID’ers, and Xians in the replies.)It is about how ID and Biologos are becoming reconciled. Again, he is torn a new one by his hoped for ‘big tent’ theory; ha ha:)

robert van bakel said:

JohnnyB (whoever the hell that moniker covers) has a rant over at UD, “A Convergence Between Biologos and the Intellijunt Design Movement”7th July 2010, (duly attacked by ID’ers, and Xians in the replies.)It is about how ID and Biologos are becoming reconciled. Again, he is torn a new one by his hoped for ‘big tent’ theory; ha ha:)

Now that is really funny.

Next step: “ID is a metaphysical research programme … but that’s okay, because that what Popper said evolution is!”

So “undirected process” is the DI’s latest attempt to smuggle the idea that evolution is “just random” into the public eye.

It still doesn’t work. Co-evolution, which produces so many of the most exquisite adaptations, isn’t undirected. Each partner in the co-evolution is driving the other in a consistent direction. Supposedly there’s an Inuit saying, “the wolf makes the caribou swift and the caribou makes the wolf strong.” There’s even “intelligent designers” involved, in the sense that both wolves and caribou have working brains.

For intelligent design to work, it isn’t enough to say that things seem “designed” or “directed.” Cdesign proponentsists also have to prove that the design and direction are *different from* the design and direction that result from living creatures interacting in observable ways. They haven’t even recognized this is a problem for their theory, let alone making a start on solving it.

The changes are really stupid… so I naturally want to pin them on Casey Luskin.

1. Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature.

If evolutionists were to follow suit, they would call themselves “evolution.”

2. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Even some of the rank-and-file UDers would cringe at this. Natural selection is the largely deterministic direction of evolution. Variation in reproduction is predominantly undirected, to the best of our knowledge.

That’s an interesting observation.

It is?

The changes are really stupid… so I naturally want to pin them on Casey Luskin.

Now THAT is an interesting observation.

I wonder whether those brainiacs at the DI realise that the word “program” (or “programme” to us Brits) refers to a plan of actions, not to the actions themselves. So they are only claiming to have some research planned. My response to them would be:

1. Please publish your program. 2. Please tell us when you’re going to start putting it into effect.

Mark,

Caling the ongoing “evolutionary” history of Intelligent Design cretinism a version of “punctuated equilibria” does a grave disservice to the mendacious proponents of ID, and especially, to invertebrate paleobiologists Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, whose 1972 paper in which they offered punctuated equilibrium as an alternative to phyletic gradualism still remains an important classic in the scientific literature of evolutionary biology. Instead, ID really resembles more some bizarre twist on Goldschmidtian “hopeful monster” saltationism, given that there have been unexpected “leaps” in expressing what ID cretinism is from its proponents, starting of course with Philip Johnson’s belated realization (in 2006) that we don’t yet have a scientific theory of ID. Maybe the Dishonesty Institute ought to head the words of DEAR LEADER JOHNSON and offer yet another spin on its pernicious mendacious intellectual pornography.

Unfortunately this “convergence” is exactly what Darrel Falk and Karl Giberson of BioLogos have stated as a desirable goal with some at the Dishonesty Institute, since they are fellow “Brothers in Christ”. At least one BioLogos associate, Stephen Matheson has recognized the folly of this, in his recent “letter” to Stephen Meyer, urging him to shed his ties to the Dishonesty Institute:

robert van bakel said:

MichaelJ, they may be trying to widen the tent to include TE, but their own schisim is having none of it; as if a new religion would tolerate blasphemers.

JohnnyB (whoever the hell that moniker covers) has a rant over at UD, “A Convergence Between Biologos and the Intellijunt Design Movement”7th July 2010, (duly attacked by ID’ers, and Xians in the replies.)It is about how ID and Biologos are becoming reconciled. Again, he is torn a new one by his hoped for ‘big tent’ theory; ha ha:)

Well, they do have a “programme” known as the Wedge Document, but they’re now hopelessly behind its implementation. Heard that Davros had beamed it down to the Dishonesty Institute from his orbiting Dalek mother ship:

Richard Wein said:

I wonder whether those brainiacs at the DI realise that the word “program” (or “programme” to us Brits) refers to a plan of actions, not to the actions themselves. So they are only claiming to have some research planned. My response to them would be:

1. Please publish your program. 2. Please tell us when you’re going to start putting it into effect.

Well, in a wonderful irony to the often stated (and always misinterpreted) claim ‘evolution is only a theory, we can now state (with a certain level of smugness) that intelligent design isn’t even a theory.

Evaluating ID as a research program doesn’t help them much. I wonder if this is an attempt to move away from claiming to be a theory because that fails under Popperian demarcation criteria and trying to move to a system more like that of Lakatos. Lakatos suggested that demarcation doesn’t occur at the level of theories and falsifiability but rather at the level of research programs and whether or not they are fruitful. So one looks at whether a theory spawns interesting experiments or just defensive hypotheses to preserve the theory. I’m pretty sure that ID fails under the Lakatos framework also.

Joshua Zelinsky said:

Evaluating ID as a research program doesn’t help them much. I wonder if this is an attempt to move away from claiming to be a theory because that fails under Popperian demarcation criteria and trying to move to a system more like that of Lakatos. Lakatos suggested that demarcation doesn’t occur at the level of theories and falsifiability but rather at the level of research programs and whether or not they are fruitful. So one looks at whether a theory spawns interesting experiments or just defensive hypotheses to preserve the theory. I’m pretty sure that ID fails under the Lakatos framework also.

Yeah, as I read this I got this picture of somebody running into the ID war-room, breathless:

I just read this thing by this guy Lakatos! We need a research program to be scientific! We have one of those, right guys? Guys?

Somehow I can’t think of this as much more than rearranging the deck chairs on the SS NUTANNICA.

That’s an excellent point, Josh. Too often I have seen from Dembski and others a blind adherence to Popperian logic. Maybe this is their not so subtle effort at trying to embrace Lakatos’s ideas as their own:

Joshua Zelinsky said:

Evaluating ID as a research program doesn’t help them much. I wonder if this is an attempt to move away from claiming to be a theory because that fails under Popperian demarcation criteria and trying to move to a system more like that of Lakatos. Lakatos suggested that demarcation doesn’t occur at the level of theories and falsifiability but rather at the level of research programs and whether or not they are fruitful. So one looks at whether a theory spawns interesting experiments or just defensive hypotheses to preserve the theory. I’m pretty sure that ID fails under the Lakatos framework also.

I haven’t encountered an “intelligent design” advocate with a grasp of Popper. Loads of lip service, like Bill Dembski deploys, but not understanding.

Thanks for the correction, Wesley:

Wesley R. Elsberry said:

I haven’t encountered an “intelligent design” advocate with a grasp of Popper. Loads of lip service, like Bill Dembski deploys, but not understanding.

I meant to say a blind adherence to the style - if not necessarily the substance - of Popper. Am sure they don’t understand Lakatos’s key point, since they don’t have any viable research program in ID, nor will they ever. Under such circumstances, as I have noted more than once, it is more logical to believe in Klingon Cosmology than it is in Intelligent Design cretinism.

Frankly, I’m surprised that the old definition stayed up so long. Nelson admitted that there was no such thing as a scientific theory of intelligent design right after the ID perps ran the first public bait and switch scam on the Ohio State board of education back in 2003. Philip Johnson made a similar admission after the Dover trial back in 2005.

My guess is that it is so well known as a bogus lie that it is starting to create negative feedback among the ID perps and the rubes that are constantly being scammed by it. You can’t run the bait and switch on every rube school board and legislator that wanted to teach the “science” of intelligent design since 2003 (years before the ID perps lost in court) and expect the creationist rubes to respect you for it.

Right now all they have supporting them are the ignorant, incompetent and the dishonest. Likely only the clueless or the guys that know it is a scam. It seems to have become common enough knowledge that ID is just bogus scam. They haven’t had to run the bait and switch in public for over a year, now. I haven’t heard of a single rube legislator or school board that has come out and wanted to teach the science of intelligent design in the past year. That likely means that enough of the creationist rubes know that ID is bogus that the only headway that they can make are with the ones dishonest enough to pick up the switch scam from the start, knowing how bogus ID is.

ID has been a ball and chain for the ID perps since they have been running the bait and switch scam publically. It is so bogus that anything that is connected to it probably has little chance to be taken seriously by any honest group of competent observers. Really, you don’t run a bait and switch on your own political support base and give them a switch scam that doesn’t even mention that your primary scam ever existed and look legitimate.

Their reliance on the ignorant and incompetent for most of their support made the situation even worse because they had to keep running the bait and switch on the stupid rubes even after Dover. You don’t run the bait and switch over and over and still expect any honest or competent people to support you. So all the competent people that they have left are the dishonest ones that have decided to keep going with the political scams when they know they have squat.

They have to keep pretending that ID might amount to something to make it look like there could be some legitimate purpose behind the obfuscation switch scam, but the insiders likely know that the switch scam amounts to blowing smoke and an attempt to keep the kids as ignorant as possible, and has about as much to do with intelligent design as creationism has to do with real science. The greatest commonality between the ID scam and the switch scam is that they are both bogus scams that the creationists have had to resort to because they do not have the science to back up their claims. It is obvious by now that if they had the science they wouldn’t have to resort to blowing smoke. Their only hope for getting what they really want taught is for an incompetent or dishonest teacher to use the switch scam as an excuse to do that. They know that they can’t teach it any other way.

So the ID perps have to nuture the dishoenst among them. They have to find a pristine group of creeationists that haven’t any evidence of falling for the ID scam. All they have gotten so far are the rubes too stupid to understand how bogus ID is. The winks and nods aren’t good enough for these types. They probably want to down play the big lie about ID (that they have a scientific theory) so that they can get more rubes to fall directly for the switch scam. They basically have to get a group of people that are able to lie about what they want to do so that the scam has some chance of getting a pass. It would be my hope that getting a group of dishonest people together on a school board somewhere would be pretty tough so they likely have to sell the switch scam to the ignorant and incompetent before the ignorant and incompetent hear about intelligent design. They are pretty much stuck because they have had to keep using ID as bait, but my guess is that the type of people that they get to take the bait and keep supporting them aren’t the type that are going to get them to what they want to do.

My guess is that the only way to do that is to make the words intelligent design as common in their propaganda as they are in their switch scam materials (zero mention). That is the likely future of intelligent design. It has become as much a pariah as creation science for the creationist’s religious political movement. They can still sell their books and junk, but they know that they have to move on.

Really, it has been over a year since I’ve heard of a rube school board or legislator wanting to teach the bogus science of intelligent design. That tells me that enough creationist rubes know that intelligent design was just a bogus scam that they can step on the ones too ignorant and incompetent to have gotten the message. To get the honest competent ones back in the movement they have to try to, at least, look more honest. To recruit the incompetent all they have to do is start downplaying intelligent design and recruit the next generation of the ignorant and incompetent to their cause.

Fubars like Expelled actually backfired on the ID movement because it resulted in cases like Florida where large numbers of school boards and legislators had to have the bait and switch run on them. It was big national news and not a single Florida legislator or school board got any of the promised ID science to teach. One thing that is suggested by this is that the science side should keep intelligent design in the lime light for as long as possible so that the ID perps will have to keep suppressing their own side. It hasn’t been the science side that has had to run the bait and switch on their own supporters. When you rely on the ignorant and incompetent for support that is what the ID perps have to keep doing. The longer that the ID perps have to do that the better for science education.

The science supporters haven’t had to do much to keep intelligent design out of the public school classrooms for over 7 years. It is the ID perps themselves that have stopped most of the rubes from attempting that. The ID perps even tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes. They didn’t bend over and take the switch scam and the rest is history.

Currently we have to contend with the obfuscation switch scam, and the best way to keep it out of the public schools has been the ID scam. Most of the rubes screw things up and mouth off about ID before they get the bait and switch run on them and those types are not very believeable in court. Just think what a fiasco it would have been for the switch scam to get someone like McLeroy on the witness stand. Keeping the blowhards lying about intelligent design science is about the best thing the science side can do. Once it goes underground, or a new generation of scam artists can claim that “we aren’t ID perps,” we can’t rely on the ID perps to convince the rubes to do something else. We would have to rely on reason, honesty and the competence of the people in the creationist political movement. That is pretty much a lost cause.

Ron, I think it took DEAR LEADER JOHNSON nearly six months after Jones’s ruling before he made his public confession:

Ron Okimoto said:

Frankly, I’m surprised that the old definition stayed up so long. Nelson admitted that there was no such thing as a scientific theory of intelligent design right after the ID perps ran the first public bait and switch scam on the Ohio State board of education back in 2003. Philip Johnson made a similar admission after the Dover trial back in 2005.

My guess is that it is so well known as a bogus lie that it is starting to create negative feedback among the ID perps and the rubes that are constantly being scammed by it. You can’t run the bait and switch on every rube school board and legislator that wanted to teach the “science” of intelligent design since 2003 (years before the ID perps lost in court) and expect the creationist rubes to respect you for it.

Right now all they have supporting them are the ignorant, incompetent and the dishonest. Likely only the clueless or the guys that know it is a scam. It seems to have become common enough knowledge that ID is just bogus scam. They haven’t had to run the bait and switch in public for over a year, now. I haven’t heard of a single rube legislator or school board that has come out and wanted to teach the science of intelligent design in the past year. That likely means that enough of the creationist rubes know that ID is bogus that the only headway that they can make are with the ones dishonest enough to pick up the switch scam from the start, knowing how bogus ID is.

ID has been a ball and chain for the ID perps since they have been running the bait and switch scam publically. It is so bogus that anything that is connected to it probably has little chance to be taken seriously by any honest group of competent observers. Really, you don’t run a bait and switch on your own political support base and give them a switch scam that doesn’t even mention that your primary scam ever existed and look legitimate.

Their reliance on the ignorant and incompetent for most of their support made the situation even worse because they had to keep running the bait and switch on the stupid rubes even after Dover. You don’t run the bait and switch over and over and still expect any honest or competent people to support you. So all the competent people that they have left are the dishonest ones that have decided to keep going with the political scams when they know they have squat.

They have to keep pretending that ID might amount to something to make it look like there could be some legitimate purpose behind the obfuscation switch scam, but the insiders likely know that the switch scam amounts to blowing smoke and an attempt to keep the kids as ignorant as possible, and has about as much to do with intelligent design as creationism has to do with real science. The greatest commonality between the ID scam and the switch scam is that they are both bogus scams that the creationists have had to resort to because they do not have the science to back up their claims. It is obvious by now that if they had the science they wouldn’t have to resort to blowing smoke. Their only hope for getting what they really want taught is for an incompetent or dishonest teacher to use the switch scam as an excuse to do that. They know that they can’t teach it any other way.

So the ID perps have to nuture the dishoenst among them. They have to find a pristine group of creeationists that haven’t any evidence of falling for the ID scam. All they have gotten so far are the rubes too stupid to understand how bogus ID is. The winks and nods aren’t good enough for these types. They probably want to down play the big lie about ID (that they have a scientific theory) so that they can get more rubes to fall directly for the switch scam. They basically have to get a group of people that are able to lie about what they want to do so that the scam has some chance of getting a pass. It would be my hope that getting a group of dishonest people together on a school board somewhere would be pretty tough so they likely have to sell the switch scam to the ignorant and incompetent before the ignorant and incompetent hear about intelligent design. They are pretty much stuck because they have had to keep using ID as bait, but my guess is that the type of people that they get to take the bait and keep supporting them aren’t the type that are going to get them to what they want to do.

My guess is that the only way to do that is to make the words intelligent design as common in their propaganda as they are in their switch scam materials (zero mention). That is the likely future of intelligent design. It has become as much a pariah as creation science for the creationist’s religious political movement. They can still sell their books and junk, but they know that they have to move on.

Really, it has been over a year since I’ve heard of a rube school board or legislator wanting to teach the bogus science of intelligent design. That tells me that enough creationist rubes know that intelligent design was just a bogus scam that they can step on the ones too ignorant and incompetent to have gotten the message. To get the honest competent ones back in the movement they have to try to, at least, look more honest. To recruit the incompetent all they have to do is start downplaying intelligent design and recruit the next generation of the ignorant and incompetent to their cause.

Fubars like Expelled actually backfired on the ID movement because it resulted in cases like Florida where large numbers of school boards and legislators had to have the bait and switch run on them. It was big national news and not a single Florida legislator or school board got any of the promised ID science to teach. One thing that is suggested by this is that the science side should keep intelligent design in the lime light for as long as possible so that the ID perps will have to keep suppressing their own side. It hasn’t been the science side that has had to run the bait and switch on their own supporters. When you rely on the ignorant and incompetent for support that is what the ID perps have to keep doing. The longer that the ID perps have to do that the better for science education.

The science supporters haven’t had to do much to keep intelligent design out of the public school classrooms for over 7 years. It is the ID perps themselves that have stopped most of the rubes from attempting that. The ID perps even tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes. They didn’t bend over and take the switch scam and the rest is history.

Currently we have to contend with the obfuscation switch scam, and the best way to keep it out of the public schools has been the ID scam. Most of the rubes screw things up and mouth off about ID before they get the bait and switch run on them and those types are not very believeable in court. Just think what a fiasco it would have been for the switch scam to get someone like McLeroy on the witness stand. Keeping the blowhards lying about intelligent design science is about the best thing the science side can do. Once it goes underground, or a new generation of scam artists can claim that “we aren’t ID perps,” we can’t rely on the ID perps to convince the rubes to do something else. We would have to rely on reason, honesty and the competence of the people in the creationist political movement. That is pretty much a lost cause.

Since when does writing error-filled books for public consumption count as a research program?

Ron Okimoto said: My guess is that the only way to do that is to make the words intelligent design as common in their propaganda as they are in their switch scam materials (zero mention).

That’s why it’s important for all of us to continue using the term “intelligent design creationism” as often as possible, to make certain everybody knows there is no difference between “intelligent design” and creationism.

Mark J -

I don’t think that the DI would ever correct anything that was wrong. My feeling is that they are seeing the success of the Biologos group. I think that they want to widen the tent to try and attract TEs by not saying that they are against evolution, they just think it was directed.

Not a chance. This would instantly cost the DI all of its funding.

Here’s why. It’s simple. The whole point of ID is denial of evolution.

ID as developed by the DI is just a bunch of very simple logic flaws dressed up with massive verbosity, in order to make evolution denial look respectable. “Irreducible complexity” is just the argument from incredulity (“I can’t conceive how it could have evolved so it couldn’t have evolved”). The “design filter” is just false dichotomy, complicated by false labeling (“If I claim it doesn’t fit into certain limited categories the only other option is ‘design’”). All of the endless references to archaeology and so on are just false analogy - in those fields, the activity of a known, natural, non-magical, well-characterized designer is studied (or in the case of SETI, an intelligent being who is similar enough to humans to make unequivocal, non-magical contact is sought - so far unsuccessfully).

The only point of any of this nonsense is to deny that the theory of evolution explains the relatedness and diversity of life on earth.

It is and always was merely an (unsuccessful) attempt to “court proof” religious denial of evolution in public schools.

Think about it. All the TE position amounts to is saying “life evolves and science is the best way to study the physical world, but I am religious anyway”.

TE is perhaps the most extreme rejection of ID. I’m not religious personally. But another common and beloved false dichotomy of creationists is to equate knowledge of science with “atheism” or “spiritual materialism”. TE is a pie in the face to that.

Lenny Flank is right. Creationists are creationists. They are driven by some type of objection to human progress and a desire to use authoritarian means to reverse that progress. They have, for whatever reason, singled out the theory of evolution as, to them, the epitome of what they obsess against. They are not going to become Quakers or liberal Episcopalians. Forget it.

I see two important concessions from their side:

1. They do not promote the theory stuff any more, because they were shooting themselves in the foot with it because it undermines to sell the “just a theory” meme with regard to evolution.

2. They removed the random mutation part, which has become increasingly difficult to defend the claim that there is no increase of information based on the very simple scenario’s by which it happens.

My prediction, their focus will shift to the aspects that have been under represented in the past discussions.…

harold said:

It is and always was merely an (unsuccessful) attempt to “court proof” religious denial of evolution in public schools.

I think at the outset there were some people interested in ID – Denton for an example – who honestly thought that evo science was preposterous and it stood to reason that they could make a legitimate case against it.

Alas this was futile, for two reasons. First, evo science is very well established, and in the end the most the critics could think of to throw at it were trivia and rephrasings of ancient arguments (as noted, irreducible complexity, which is just a rephrased Paley argument). Second, there was no real constituency who cared about a scientific argument, the audience being absolutely dominated by creationists.

And from the outset there were folks involved who saw exercise as one in evasion – “cdesign proponentsists”. Ultimately I think ID will disappear as ID folk weary of maintaining some of their biggest evasions and oldline creationists adopt the arguments – the effective distinction is slight and getting slighter all the time.

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

Didn’t know that whether one does or doesn’t agree with either myself or Dale (or others who are in agreement here and elsewhere with us) is a subject worthy of a democratic election:

phantomreader42 said: Apparently, like Dogmatic Dale, you are incapable of comprehending the fact that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you.

Since when were you appointed the official “Speaker” of Panda’s Thumb, urging others to “vote” in a manner which you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians would approve of?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Didn’t know that whether one does or doesn’t agree with either myself or Dale (or others who are in agreement here and elsewhere with us) is a subject worthy of a democratic election:

phantomreader42 said: Apparently, like Dogmatic Dale, you are incapable of comprehending the fact that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you.

Since when were you appointed the official “Speaker” of Panda’s Thumb, urging others to “vote” in a manner which you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians would approve of?

The only one here who mentioned a “vote” was you. The only one who pretended to have the authority to tell other people what they can and cannot say was Dogmatic Dale. You’re incoherent and delusional.

And of course by asserting that it’s a “popularity contest” that you claim that there is no “voting” here. Speaking of absurdity, thy name is you phantom-twit. You’re the one who is both incoherent and delusional, especially given your bizarre rants and raves against Dale and myself:

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Didn’t know that whether one does or doesn’t agree with either myself or Dale (or others who are in agreement here and elsewhere with us) is a subject worthy of a democratic election:

phantomreader42 said: Apparently, like Dogmatic Dale, you are incapable of comprehending the fact that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you.

Since when were you appointed the official “Speaker” of Panda’s Thumb, urging others to “vote” in a manner which you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians would approve of?

The only one here who mentioned a “vote” was you. The only one who pretended to have the authority to tell other people what they can and cannot say was Dogmatic Dale. You’re incoherent and delusional.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And of course by asserting that it’s a “popularity contest” that you claim that there is no “voting” here. Speaking of absurdity, thy name is you phantom-twit. You’re the one who is both incoherent and delusional, especially given your bizarre rants and raves against Dale and myself:

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Didn’t know that whether one does or doesn’t agree with either myself or Dale (or others who are in agreement here and elsewhere with us) is a subject worthy of a democratic election:

phantomreader42 said: Apparently, like Dogmatic Dale, you are incapable of comprehending the fact that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you.

Since when were you appointed the official “Speaker” of Panda’s Thumb, urging others to “vote” in a manner which you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians would approve of?

The only one here who mentioned a “vote” was you. The only one who pretended to have the authority to tell other people what they can and cannot say was Dogmatic Dale. You’re incoherent and delusional.

Again, I did not at any time mention a “popularity contest”. Are you making shit up or are you actually hallucinating posts that I never made? Are you crazy or a liar, or, as seems more likely with every post you make, both?

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

No, you didn’t refer to a “popularity contest” phantom-twit? Then why raise the issue that Dale and I ought to know that others don’t agree with us. Might come as a surprise for you to know that we do. But we’re indifferent to what passes for “public opinion” amongst you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians:

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And of course by asserting that it’s a “popularity contest” that you claim that there is no “voting” here. Speaking of absurdity, thy name is you phantom-twit. You’re the one who is both incoherent and delusional, especially given your bizarre rants and raves against Dale and myself:

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Didn’t know that whether one does or doesn’t agree with either myself or Dale (or others who are in agreement here and elsewhere with us) is a subject worthy of a democratic election:

phantomreader42 said: Apparently, like Dogmatic Dale, you are incapable of comprehending the fact that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you.

Since when were you appointed the official “Speaker” of Panda’s Thumb, urging others to “vote” in a manner which you and your fellow Fundamentalist New Atheist barbarians would approve of?

The only one here who mentioned a “vote” was you. The only one who pretended to have the authority to tell other people what they can and cannot say was Dogmatic Dale. You’re incoherent and delusional.

Again, I did not at any time mention a “popularity contest”. Are you making shit up or are you actually hallucinating posts that I never made? Are you crazy or a liar, or, as seems more likely with every post you make, both?

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

Go get a life please. Has it occurred to you at all that I might be sarcastic, merely to lump you in with each and every delusional Pharyngulite troll who drives by here:

phantomreader42 said:

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

You’re hopeless and in dire need of assistance. Have a good day.

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Oh, I see. You were knowingly and deliberately attributing comments to me that I did not make. You’re a liar. Thanks for clearing that up.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Go get a life please. Has it occurred to you at all that I might be sarcastic, merely to lump you in with each and every delusional Pharyngulite troll who drives by here:

phantomreader42 said:

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

You’re hopeless and in dire need of assistance. Have a good day.

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

If I’m a liar, then you’re a hopelessly pathetic, quite delusional, liar in search of some kind of mental help. Go get it soon please:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, I see. You were knowingly and deliberately attributing comments to me that I did not make. You’re a liar. Thanks for clearing that up.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Go get a life please. Has it occurred to you at all that I might be sarcastic, merely to lump you in with each and every delusional Pharyngulite troll who drives by here:

phantomreader42 said:

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

You’re hopeless and in dire need of assistance. Have a good day.

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Sarcasm is supposed to be humorous. What you said was not funny, it did not even come close to being funny, it was just you randomly accusing me of saying something I did not say. Sarcasm is supposed to be over-the-top, but you don’t seem to have an over-the-top setting, given that you, apparently in all seriousness, wrote to a certain well-known blogger demanding expensive camera equipment, and accused the President of the United States of running some kind of vast socialist conspiracy. If you were attempting sarcasm, you failed miserably.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Go get a life please. Has it occurred to you at all that I might be sarcastic, merely to lump you in with each and every delusional Pharyngulite troll who drives by here:

phantomreader42 said:

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

You’re hopeless and in dire need of assistance. Have a good day.

The Soviet Union was dissolved in December 1991, not October 1990 as I mentioned moments ago in error:

John Kwok said:

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Oh, come on! Bringing up your high school again? People, are we sure Kwok isn’t just some sort of elaborate hoax? Because I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that a human being this insane is capable of feeding himself and operating a computer.

And yeah, the Nazis were socialist, just like North Korea is a democracy and China is a republic, and socialism conveniently has no definition beyond “whatever boogeyman the right wing is screeching about today”. And the commies and the Nazis all loved each other, that whole thing about going to war was just a smokescreen to throw people off the scent of their vast conspiracy to put a center-right politician in the White House decades after they were all dead.

See, THAT’S how you do sarcasm.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Go f**k yourself. I don’t have the patience to deal with your deranged verbal diarrhea and crude efforts at masturbation:

phantomreader42 said:

Sarcasm is supposed to be humorous. What you said was not funny, it did not even come close to being funny, it was just you randomly accusing me of saying something I did not say. Sarcasm is supposed to be over-the-top, but you don’t seem to have an over-the-top setting, given that you, apparently in all seriousness, wrote to a certain well-known blogger demanding expensive camera equipment, and accused the President of the United States of running some kind of vast socialist conspiracy. If you were attempting sarcasm, you failed miserably.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Go get a life please. Has it occurred to you at all that I might be sarcastic, merely to lump you in with each and every delusional Pharyngulite troll who drives by here:

phantomreader42 said:

When I say that you are incapable of comprehending that more than one person on the planet disagrees with you, I am referring to the fact that you treat everyone who disagrees with you as a single monolithic mass, with no distinctions between them, acting as if they are all in total lockstep and blaming each for the statments of all others, as if they were all one person. I am referring to the fact that you rant at me for things other people said, without any apparent recognition that I was not the one who said them. The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend is that there are multiple people who disagree with you, and these people are not clones of each other, or mindless zombie slaves of PZ Myers, but actual living human beings, separate individuals who have their own thoughts.

You’re hopeless and in dire need of assistance. Have a good day.

They’re both fellow alumni, and I know, from someone active in alumni affairs, that at least one has been quite active in that as well. Why don’t you look up their biographies to see that I’m telling the truth. But of course you won’t, since you’d rather believe every insane lie you can think of about me. Good luck in assuming room temperature soon. At least you can do your part by helping to reduce the world’s surplus population of mentally defective internet trolls such as yourself:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, come on! Bringing up your high school again? People, are we sure Kwok isn’t just some sort of elaborate hoax? Because I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that a human being this insane is capable of feeding himself and operating a computer.

And yeah, the Nazis were socialist, just like North Korea is a democracy and China is a republic, and socialism conveniently has no definition beyond “whatever boogeyman the right wing is screeching about today”. And the commies and the Nazis all loved each other, that whole thing about going to war was just a smokescreen to throw people off the scent of their vast conspiracy to put a center-right politician in the White House decades after they were all dead.

See, THAT’S how you do sarcasm.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Whether or not Presidential advisors went to your high school is totally irrelevant. It’s so irrelevant that there’s no reason for you to bring it up except that you apparently can’t stop yourself from compulsively name-dropping.

Get this through your thick skull: Nobody cares where you went to high school! Spending every waking moment trying to bring back your glory days does not make you look smart, it does not make you look cool, it just makes you look pathetic, like you’ve never done anything worth noting since graduation. Which, even if true, is not a fact you want to be constantly drawing attention to.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

They’re both fellow alumni, and I know, from someone active in alumni affairs, that at least one has been quite active in that as well. Why don’t you look up their biographies to see that I’m telling the truth. But of course you won’t, since you’d rather believe every insane lie you can think of about me. Good luck in assuming room temperature soon. At least you can do your part by helping to reduce the world’s surplus population of mentally defective internet trolls such as yourself:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, come on! Bringing up your high school again? People, are we sure Kwok isn’t just some sort of elaborate hoax? Because I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that a human being this insane is capable of feeding himself and operating a computer.

And yeah, the Nazis were socialist, just like North Korea is a democracy and China is a republic, and socialism conveniently has no definition beyond “whatever boogeyman the right wing is screeching about today”. And the commies and the Nazis all loved each other, that whole thing about going to war was just a smokescreen to throw people off the scent of their vast conspiracy to put a center-right politician in the White House decades after they were all dead.

See, THAT’S how you do sarcasm.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

(sigh)

So anyway, about these DI word games…

It’s like when Deep Thought asks the philosophers what they mean by the question “Life, the Universe, and Everything”.

“Yes, but what exactly is it?”

“You know, just everything!”

I love the excerpts posted in the AtBC forums, lots of insistence that “it’s a theory that life was designed!”. Yes, but, what, exactly is it? Without the 5W’s, it’s not a theory, it’s just a hunch. Or more accurately a rationalization.

It’s as irrelvant fuckface as your delusional insistance that I believe in some insane conspiracy theories. But it is relevant when you contend that I believe in conspiracy theories pertaining to the President of the United States and I just told you that the chance of that is extremely unlikely, especially when two of his key advisors are fellow alumni of our high school:

phantomreader42 said:

Whether or not Presidential advisors went to your high school is totally irrelevant. It’s so irrelevant that there’s no reason for you to bring it up except that you apparently can’t stop yourself from compulsively name-dropping.

Get this through your thick skull: Nobody cares where you went to high school! Spending every waking moment trying to bring back your glory days does not make you look smart, it does not make you look cool, it just makes you look pathetic, like you’ve never done anything worth noting since graduation. Which, even if true, is not a fact you want to be constantly drawing attention to.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

They’re both fellow alumni, and I know, from someone active in alumni affairs, that at least one has been quite active in that as well. Why don’t you look up their biographies to see that I’m telling the truth. But of course you won’t, since you’d rather believe every insane lie you can think of about me. Good luck in assuming room temperature soon. At least you can do your part by helping to reduce the world’s surplus population of mentally defective internet trolls such as yourself:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, come on! Bringing up your high school again? People, are we sure Kwok isn’t just some sort of elaborate hoax? Because I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that a human being this insane is capable of feeding himself and operating a computer.

And yeah, the Nazis were socialist, just like North Korea is a democracy and China is a republic, and socialism conveniently has no definition beyond “whatever boogeyman the right wing is screeching about today”. And the commies and the Nazis all loved each other, that whole thing about going to war was just a smokescreen to throw people off the scent of their vast conspiracy to put a center-right politician in the White House decades after they were all dead.

See, THAT’S how you do sarcasm.

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Study your history moron. Germany was a totalitarian state from 1932 to 1945 ruled by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. From November 1917 through October 1990, Russia was known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), ruled by a Marxist - Leninist Communist Dictatorship.

As for “conspiracy theories”, you’ve forgotten that I rejected long ago the wingnut “Birther” contention that Obama was born in East Africa. And do you honestly think I would condone anything even remotely resembling assassination, when two of the key advisors of the President of the United States, senior White House advisor David Axelrod and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are prominent alumni of our high school alma mater here in New York City?

You’ve lost any semblance of rationality phantom-twit. Have a good day and take a break from posting here. I will, since I have other, more important, issues to contend with:

phantomreader42 said:

Ah, so you’re back to the conspiracy theories and babbling about “socialism”. How long until you throw in birfer bullshit or call for an assassination?

Can you even wrap your mind around the concept that more than one person can think you’re wrong without all of them being involved in a vast conspiracy to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

And how do you know it’s not relevant? If I believe it is, then I’ll mention it (And if it isn’t, then I won’t).

I was going to ignore you now, but thought against it, merely because you are, like your fellow delusional Pharyngulites, interested only in hatred, in condemning those who don’t agree with you, and, where possible, in smearing the reputations of critics whom you regard as offensive. Of course this is what you regard as “Democratic” and “Liberal” thought, but actually, as far more in common with what has transpired in the infamous “Socialist” dictatorships of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

You’re merely rambling way phantom-twit and again I wish you a good day. Just take the hint and shut up:

phantomreader42 said:

Oh, so you say you have more important things to think about than PZ Myers? Then why did you feel compelled to whine about him when it was totally irrelevant? No one is forcing you to screech at the top of your lungs about PZ, and blame him for everyone that dares question you, that’s all your decision. If you don’t care about Pharyngula, why keep babbling about a comment made there months ago, that no one but you is still obsessed with? If you don’t care about being banned from the Intersection, why even bring it up? What relevance does it have? I didn’t mention the ridiculous incident with the Leica. YOU did. Why would you do that, if, as you claim, it’s of so little importance to you?

Scanning back through this thread, YOU were the first person to mention Pharyngula, YOU were the first person to mention that old comment that you claim was a “rape threat”, YOU were the first person to mention PZ. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t PZ. It wasn’t one of the other people who disagrees with you that you seem incapable of distinguishing from me and PZ, it was YOU.

So, if you have more important things to do than obsess over PZ, why don’t you go do them?

John Wilkes Kwok said:

What obsession? That it is both fair and reasonable to note that, by his own admission, he is a mediocre biologist, delights in engaging in frat-boy antics, and, were it not for Pharynugla, that no one would have been interested in him, period? Sorry, phantom-twit, these are fair observations to make (along with the sad, but true, one declaring that Pharyngula is an intellectual cesspool, especially in light of the fact that he tolerated a “joke” about wanting to “fuck” and to stab others with a rusty knife). Now if I were making them each and every second of my adult waking life, then that would demonstrate that I am suffering an obsession about him.

Hate to disappoint you phantom-twit, but have a lot more important obligations and interests to contend with than worrying about PZ. More than once I have noted here and elsewhere, in reponse to delusional, intellectually-challenged Pharyngulie trolls like yourself, that I couldn’t care that he has banned me at Pharyngula or that I really don’t want expensive Leica photographic equipment from him. But again and again, you and other Pharyngulites bring it up as though I spent my every waking moment thinking of how I’d get reinstated at Pharyngula or get the Leica photographic equipment which PZ owes me.

Since I get these very questions again, and again, could it be that those who are obsessed about PZ are the very ones accusing me of such an obsession? I think so. You ought to deal with your own PZ Myers obsession phantom-twit before worrying about mine (On a somewhat different, but related, subject, I will never think of asking PZ for reinstatement at his blog (or any other blog I have been banned from). That pledge stands in stark contrast with Ophelia Benson’s pathetic effort at getting reinstated over at The Intersection (And before you comment further about my own banishment from there, I’ve already told Sheril and a mutual friend of ours that I have no interest in making a similar demand of her and Chris Mooney.).

phantomreader42 said:

John Wilkes Kwok said:

Yours is the observation of a most sanctimonious hypocrite:

phantomreader42 said: I have, however, concluded that you are unable to separate science (or, for that matter, anything) from your compulsive name-dropping and bizarre obsessive verbal tics.

An observation I’ll remember the next time you pledge your fealty to your New Atheist apostle, one Paul Zachary the Great of the clan Myers.

You really, really need to get over this obsession you have with PZ Myers. It’s not healthy.

Pretending that atheism is a religion devoted to the worship of PZ is something a psychotic creotard with severe brain damage would do. Have you really gone so insane that you can’t see how far you’ve sunk?

Why don’t you learn Seppuku? Think you’d be just perfect for that.

Share your exasperation, fnxtr. I found Meyer’s “Signature in the Cell” both annoying and tedious to read, and probably for much of the same reason:

fnxtr said:

(sigh)

So anyway, about these DI word games…

It’s like when Deep Thought asks the philosophers what they mean by the question “Life, the Universe, and Everything”.

“Yes, but what exactly is it?”

“You know, just everything!”

I love the excerpts posted in the AtBC forums, lots of insistence that “it’s a theory that life was designed!”. Yes, but, what, exactly is it? Without the 5W’s, it’s not a theory, it’s just a hunch. Or more accurately a rationalization.

fnxtr said:

(sigh)

So anyway, about these DI word games…

It’s like when Deep Thought asks the philosophers what they mean by the question “Life, the Universe, and Everything”.

“Yes, but what exactly is it?”

“You know, just everything!”

I love the excerpts posted in the AtBC forums, lots of insistence that “it’s a theory that life was designed!”. Yes, but, what, exactly is it? Without the 5W’s, it’s not a theory, it’s just a hunch. Or more accurately a rationalization.

In before the thread lock! :-P

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Guest Contributor published on July 10, 2010 10:08 PM.

A Hate Mail Poe? was the previous entry in this blog.

Evil Monkey See, Evil Monkey Do 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 4.361

Site Meter