The Bathroom Wall
With any tavern, one can expect that certain things that get said are out-of-place. But there is one place where almost any saying or scribble can find a home: the bathroom wall. This is where random thoughts and oddments that don’t follow the other entries at the Panda’s Thumb wind up. As with most bathroom walls, expect to sort through a lot of oyster guts before you locate any pearls of wisdom.
This is a test of the new Bathroom Wall
bumping
bumping
More testing.
Dang; if only somebody had told me there wuz gonna be a test I could’a studied fer it… :p
Entries here show up on the main page’s Recent Comments panel. Should they? I’m thinking that perhaps all the bathroom wall traffic will drown out the main PT comments rendering the Recent Comments panel less than useful.
I may not be able to prevent comments on pages from showing up in the recent comments box, but I’ll look into it. Thanks for pointing that out.
BTW the Update function is really cool. I trust it will be featured on the main site soon?
Oops, ignore my last comment. The answer is implicit in your original post
This should be fun!
http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/600991
Blog: Stages of denialism
Denialists never want to admit that they are wrong about anything, so they keep a debate going as long as possible to sooth their egos. Then, when their views are discredited by the mainstream scientific communities, they appeal to the prejudices of the general public instead.
Global Warming (GW) denialist stages:
“Global warming is not happening and may not happen. Why worry about it?”
“Global warming IS happening, but there is no evidence that humans are a factor in the problem.”
“Global warming is happening, humans are a factor, but there is nothing we can do to stop it anyway.”
‘Global warming is happening, humans are a factor, we can stop it, but the costs of trying to stop it would outweigh the benefits.”
Decades ago, most GW denialists were at stage one. Today, most of them are at stage two, with some already moving to stage three or four. Truly honest and fair people should have stopped at stage one.
Creationist (evolution denialist) stages:
“Species are eternal and unchanging, existing in their present form since Creation. There is no evidence for evolution.”
“Species do change, but only within the limits of created kinds. Evidence cited for evolution can also fit within Creationism.”
“Even if evolution occurs, an Intelligent Designer must have been involved, so complex are some biological forms.”
“Evolution is as unscientific as Creationism.”
The difference between a skeptic and a denialist, on any subject, is that a real skeptic knows in advance what evidence would convince him that something is real or that action of a certain kind is justified. A denialist has no such standards. His commitment to an ideology trumps any scientific standard. Gaps in scientific knowledge, which would motivate most scientists to look for more data, are wrongly used by denialists to reject completely a concept they do not like because of prejudice. This is dishonesty.
I’ve changed the panel size to ten to make it easier for y’all to play with it. We’ll eventually settle on a larger number.
Great idea.
Besides color (and tabbing the BW from the main page) I would suggest keeping or increasing PT default font size - no reason to humor trolls ranting off masses of texts.
With this PT has evolved as a dynamic site on the web. Kudos!
PS: In preview I get the default font size. Yet another reason to keep posted comments as default size.
‘Nuther thing: refreshed the 2nd page and got back to page 1. Saturday is cookie day, nom nom nom - but anyways.
There is cookie support, for the last viewed tab, but it may be iffy.
I’m not sure what you mean about font sizes. Are you asking for comments to have the same font size as the entries?
If you access the page normally via the url http://pandasthumb.org/bw/, then last page viewed will be properly retrieved. If you use the a link with a fragment ID, then it won’t try to cookie. I’ll try to patch the tabs library that we’re using to change that.
The tabs also understand links to specific comments and will load the proper panel. Try it out.
http://pandasthumb.org/bw/#comment-149706
It seems Sal Cordova has matriculated back to UcD. He is now holding forth on how Fisher’s Theorem is the death of Darwinism, on the back of Michael Lynch’s new book on genetic architecture.
If by Darwinism, Sal means the strawman pseudo-religion invented by creationists, great! Kick it down, Sal, just don’t erect Kimuraism in its place when you find that we haven’t all become YECs.
If, OTOH, Sal means a theory composed of strands assuming Deep Time, common descent, variability, and selection, then he should increase his dosage. Nothing in Lynch affects those things. As I understand Lynch’s work, the relatively small populations of eukaryotes and multicellular organisms coupled with neutral drift is the key source of variation upon which selection operates.
Sal also does a quick switch in his post between ‘biodiversity’ as used in a quote from Lynch, and ‘diversity’ as used in a discussion of Fisher’s Theorem. The two terms mean vastly different things.
Yup; both for hampering trolls and for editing breaks et cetera in fairly accurate previews.
Comment preview is going to become 2.0ified as well. The preview will be displayed on the entry page, probably under the update button.
On Wallace’s personal blog he whines
Such a lovely display of Christian ethics and morals… Not only is his foolish behavior undermining his own credibility (what little there is left of it) but Wallace seems perfectly content in dragging down Christianity with him.
Bump test:
http://pandasthumb.org/bw/#comment-149706
Okay, I changed the hue of the default color scheme to fit with our bluish color scheme.
[Crossposted from Good Math, Bad Math]
@ SC:
Oh, you are here now, kvetching over the same points. As the Panda’s Thumb thread that activated you is now closed due to your ranting, I will post my belated answer here instead. (Isn’t the ability to google crosslinks to get to the full picture wonderful?)
On PT:
The URL DiEb looked at and when skewered you, sparing me the analysis?
Here:
The thread here answered that already, but more detail is provided in the link above.
The continuing misunderstanding of how to make proper limits is clearly exhibited, demonstrating the shallowness that Mike Elzinga, DiEB and others have noted several times over now.
H fckng sshls. plgz t Dvsn NW bfr gt pssd ff nd strt fckng wth . dn’t wnt t mk m md. Trst m n ths. r scrt scks bg tm.
H fckng sshls. plgz t Dvsn NW bfr gt pssd ff nd strt fckng wth . dn’t wnt t mk m md. Trst m n ths. r scrt scks bg tm.
^ | | Oh good, it works.
Not only is his foolish behavior undermining his own credibility (what little there is left of it) but Wallace seems perfectly content in dragging down Christianity with him.
why oh why do you let people who are obviously not completely (or even partially) sane get to you so, Pim?
he certainly doesn’t speak for xianity, or ID, or creationism, or anything other than the random delusions flitting through his skull.
I hope you at least can confine your non-arguments with him in this new locale.
Frankly, i still say he’s not worth your effort.
What Ichthyic said. I made one final insult to whatever Wallace had been blubbering about, but he is not worth ANYONE’s time, save as a crashtest dummy.
So why post a mention of him at all? Well, I feel that creationists reveal the seabed of asshole-ish stupidity (as opposed to crackpot asshole-ish-ness and stupidity, though there are PLENTY of those, more mundane, types of creationists, of course!), but the thing that mimics a human personality sometimes takes on compellingly repulsive forms, unique in their awfulness. Anything unique is a treasure to be admired, at least for a very brief time. Or so I deeply believe. The wonder of the human mind, to this mere human, is that the most sickeningly ugly dross can be used to understand life (yes, and the UNiverse and everything.) Sal Cordova represents one of these bizarrely ugly mounds of dishonesty that move along sifting through the intellectual/moral/spiritual feces that covers the bare idiocy of standard creationism. I believe W. Wallace, like some self-poisoning pair of ragged claws, scuttling across the putrid floors of this silent poisoned sea represents another.
From a very, very distant point of view, William Wallace provides us all with a unique service, although thanking him for that service would be absurd: he provides it despite himself, and I would never wish his fate on the shittiest person I have ever met.
Booger!
Ben Stein pooped here.
Not sure about the argument you are referring to but if the past few days is any reference point at all then I couldn’t blame novparl one bit for ignoring you morons any more than I could blame J. Brandt for ignoring you.
Imagine you are J. Brandt. Your child needs educational resources. You visit the University of Ediacara Website because you have heard that they are a valuable resource for evolution education, endorsed by Scientific American and the NCSE. You click on the WALL button thinking that this might be an appropriate place to post a generic question. You are greeted by a slurry of epithets, insults and foul language as culture warriors are in full battle regalia against an IDiot troll.
Undeterred you politely ask your question. For good measure you follow up with the polite suggestion that maybe it would be more “intelligent” to focus on science than to engage in the culture warrior brouhaha.
At this point, you Panda’s Thumbers had a choice.
You could have: A)Offered some advice B)Recommended some book titles or links C)Informed J. Brandt that libraries usually have request lists for books D)Told J. Brandt that libraries can also borrow books from other libraries and to check nearby towns.
or
E)Ignore him and attack the IDiot troll.
Shame on you.
Shame on all of you.
Hypocrites.
Well clearly you’re to holy and perfect to be seen here, chunk. You are free to take your bitterness and resentment elsewhere. It’s just a website, why is it so important to you? Just leave.
too
If by “culture war” you mean defending real science from religious fuckwits who want to send our kids back to the 1400’s, or put new-age flakery in place of critical thinking, remember we didn’t start this dustup.
Who’s side are you on, chunky? You pretend you’re all about critical thinking but that’s a crock and you know it. Are you a failed science geek, by any chance? You seem to have it in for those who actually know what they’re talking about.
Still no advice for the guest who is starving for scientific knowledge.
And yet the battle rages on…
For hygiene reasons, food is not served in the bathrooms. Pistachios, cashews and peanuts (but not wingnuts) are served in the main bar area. It is bar policy that “Cheesy Puffs” are not sold here. These may be obtained at the Irish-themed pub in the Theology Building, “O’Leary’s”.
Read some books? I dunno, I only offer that because it worked for me. And because chunkdz doesn’t seem to have tried it himself…
Read books? Surely you jest!
1. Go to U.C.’s understanding evolution web page.
2. Buy Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish. And read it.
There, that’s two suggestions, now stop complaining we never offer any.
Oh, and incidentally, the U. Ediacara page doesn’t have a “wall button,” so you might want to modify your martyr story to make it more believeable.
If you click on the Links tab at the top of the page, you will find several hundred links to the kind of information you whine is not offered. I guess you are not very observant.
That’s crazy talk.
Fuckwit.
Does anyone here believe that if J. Brandt had been promptly responded to and helped out, that that the nature and tenor of Chunkdz’s subsequent comments would have been at all different?
chunkdz,
If you don’t know what we are talkiing about why did you respond? For your information, novparl asked a stupid question implying that evolutionary theory had no answer in a feeble attempt to derail a thread. When I responded and showed that his question was meaningless, he never bothered to address the relevant issues. He did however continiue to hurl insults all over the bathroom wall, something you apparently approve of. Now either you condone his behavior or you don’t. If you do, then you are the only hypocrite here. If you don’t, then you should not single out anyone else who for ridicule.
Now are you going to offer any help to the guy who wants some children’s books? If not, then you can’t really complain if someone else doesn’t do it now can you? Shame on you.
Translation: Go somewhere else unless you want to get whacked with a papier mache broadaxe.
I have no idea what goes on with you and novparl. Don’t quite care either.
I’m just the IDiot troll, remember? You are the “Defender of Science”.
But it is duly noted that you once again continue the “attack the IDiot troll” strategy while J. Brandt still does not have a single book recommendation for his science starved child.
Why don’t you stop arguing and go buy some more duct tape from Home Depot. Your shield is looking a little ragged.
Inner fish is a great book but I doubt that J. Brandt’s elementary school library will have much use for it as it is meant for AP biology or undergraduate level Bio.
Or perhaps you simply weren’t paying attention to J. Brandt’s question because you were too busy making a spear out of a discarded aluminum broom handle. (Make sure you glue an old tennis ball to the business end!)
chunkdz,
When you display some behavior other than that which you object to, then you will have the right to criticize. You berate others for doing what novparl has elevated to a high art, then you imply that your ignorance of what he does is your excuse. Then you object because no one provides an answer to a question when you did’t either. Well how do you know who read the post asking for help and who didn’t? If ignorance is your only defense, why can’t anyone else use that as an excuse as well?
If you don’t like the answers provided, then why did you claim they were never given? If you don’t like the answers given, why don’t you suggest some yourself? If not, why don’t you quit complaining about others?
When have you ever defended science? Why haven’t you? Why do you care if anyone else does or not? Why should anyone else care if you do or not? The only reason why people attack trolls is because they refuse to address the science. That’s why we are discussing this on the bathroom wall, remember?
J. Brandt,
If you are still out there, here is a web site that describes several book on evolution for school age children. I cannot recommend them personally, but there are reviews included on the site. All are under 13 dollars and should be appropriate for a school library.
http://www.amazon.com/Tree-Life-Won[…]p/0879758198
Some of the titles include:
The Tree of Life
Life on Earth: The Story of Evolution
Our Family Tree: An Evolution Story
Darwin and Evolution for Kids
From Lava to Life
Now we can all sit back and wait for Chunkdz to come back with a much more positive and constructive way of commenting, right?
You still don’t get it. I don’t play for either team.
I wasn’t attacked because I am anti-science. I was attacked because I am anti - Panda’s Thumb. As soon as I criticized PT, the culture warriors kick into defensive mode. Emotion takes over. And “science” becomes just a banner to fly over your little cardboard covered army. We can all see what your true motivation is - and it ain’t science.
From Lava to Life?
J. Brandt was asking for science - not science-fiction. But good effort all the same.
Isn’t it easier to see without that helmet made from a Kool Whip tub?
chunkdz,
I do get it. You don’t do anything. All you do is criticize others. You are completely worthless. You have never defended science and yet you criticize others for not doing so. You have never discussed science and yet you criticize otheres for not doing so.
If you don’t like these books, what books would you recommend? Why have you not done so? Have you read the books? If not, why do you criticize them? Is there any possible thing that anyone could do that you would not criticize? Who cares? We know what your true motivation is and it ain’t pretty.
If anyone is really interested in the Lave to Life book, this web page has a review by a scientist:
www.amazon.com/Lava-Life-Universe-Sharing-Children/dp/1584690429/ref=pd_sim_b_5
The review claims that there are no scientific inaccuracies and that every child should read this book. I have not read the book, so I will not comment further. Perhaps others should follow this example. J. Brandt is of course freee to use his own judgement.
No, clearly you’re just here to get attention.
This reminds me of the whining crybaby who insisted he was being discriminated against in the job market because he was a straight white male, when it was clear to everyone around him that the reason he was being discriminated against was that he was an obnoxious prick with zero social value.
Now there’s one for Alanis.
Never, in your entire history here have you ever presented any positive evidence for.. well, anything, actually.
Why are you here, exactly?
He’s here because he is trolling for man meat to add to his list of one hand reads. He’s fantasized about what it would be like to have a homosexual relationship with Wes Elsberry, Richard Dawkins, Nick Matzke among others. When we had many laughs about this at AtBC chuckles showed up to find some new boyfriends try to say that it wasn’t that gay, it was just “fun”.
If you are into laughing at chuck for a while you can start ttp://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=SP;f=14;t=5205;p=142543>here and follow the links. the best parts are when he shows up and says “there is nothing homoerotic about what I wrote” lololololol
yeah right chuck and you are here because you don’t play for either team.
bwahahahahaha what an idiot
screw these damn tags
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bi[…]205;p=142543
Update