This makes TWO zombie threads that I’ve killed now. POW, right in the head.
Don’t you dare resurrect it.
By the way, you would be amazed at how many Zombie Jesus graphics you can find on the web.
TZT
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Louis
exposed text
<acronym title=”hidden text”>exposed text</acronym>
exposed text
<acronym title=”hidden text”><a href=”address”>exposed text </a></acronym>
No promises.
Tinker with it.
Very nice touch at 497 PZ.
Chigau,
I am embarrassed that it is that simple and I didn’t already know.
Louis
Louis
You’re welcome.
I work these things out by plodding trial-and-correction.
When it works, I save a sample in a word file and cut-paste thereafter.
Working it out a second time would make my head asplode.
Louis: Oh, it took me a bit of time to figure out the potential of the system as well.
Well this technique plays into a variety of biases I have. I love small things, I used to make miniaturised timetables for school etc when I was a kid. All by hand. I was quite pleased to get a very sharpened pencil nub, a small cube of eraser rubber and my two-week class schedule into a snuff box (about 1 cm square and 0.5 cm deep). The schedule I had used fine nib pens/pencils to write (legibly) onto two sides of a 0.5cm square card.
I can see myself getting a little out of control with it. I love things like Rube Goldberg machines. Subtle little tricks, quasi-hidden items.
Oh well.
Louis
Just dropping in to share a pic of two really bad-ass cats.
Are those cats willing to be fired from a moon-sized space station via an energy beam at a particularly pestilent microorganism?
First A.R, … and now Teh Ebil Oberlawd!
Is there no remit for eight pawed pimpernels?
(Chigau, commence with plan 9 .)
{Speaking to minion} Divert power from all non-essential systems to the sensor arrays. We’re looking for a microorganism approximately 0.1 millimeters in size.
theophontes: Your codes have been cracked. Teh Oberlawd will find you if you leave this thread. You may surrender now before I’m forced to irradiate the entire thread again.
@ A.R
Oh, so you think it is time for this?
{camera pans to battlefield scene. a small tardigrade in GI gear is in its bunker, on the radio} …bzzt the situation is dire…WE ARE OUT OF TONIC WATER!!!…. *crackle* … bzzzT …..{static} … send in airstrike…TZT … kill it with fire … bzzT … pffft ….
{Speaking to minion} Charge the weapon to maximum output. Target the bunker that radio signal just came from. You may fire when ready.
{Minion speaking}
Target locked, weapon charging sequence initiated.
{A few seconds later, minion again}
Commence primary ignition.
BZZZZZZZZT
{A spear of blue-green energy impacts the bunker, the entire scene flashes white}
{Minion}
Scans of the surface do not detect any life forms in the blast zone.
@ A.R
The Great cyberWall of China has protected me from that image.
{notes approvingly that all weeds have been well eradicated from teh garden}
This is never going to work because I haz a . Where do you type the sekret words you want to appear when hovered-over?
Freezing the oceans?
@ opposable
Kindly step onto the transporter —-> . <—-
@ Therrin
Mmmmh… 0_o
{theophontes starts dismantling the chest freezer to remove refrigerator coil, calculates how long the extension cord must be to make it across the beach.}
… we could save money if we wait ’til high tide. But then we also have to freeze much more water… decisions, decisions…
Thank you, theophontes (if I may presume to be so familiar as to address you thus, omitting the 777 – not out of any aversion to said elegant numerals (so becoming in their asymmetry) but, solely, of course, in the interests of brevity – ah, brevity, the soul of that wit in which I am so sadly lacking. But I digress.)
I had indeed followed the example in the first line of chigau’s #501, which gave me exposed text – I tried it out by closing my sentence with a . – but when I hover over my own . of course it just reveals the word “hidden”. My (or should I say, my ) is such that I can’t work out where to type the sekret cunning plan messages such that their sekret cunningness will be revealed by hovering :-(
(I note that Louis, despite his disingenuously ingenuous claims to be COMPOOTAH LITRAT, worked it out right away. The man is clearly an arrant imposter and should be unmasked forthwith).
I R COMPOOTAH LITRAT! I CAN HAS MANY INTERNETS!
Louis
Louis, you dastardly fiend, did you really leave already? And if not, where do you type the sekret text, dammit?!
If you do not spill the beans, I may be forced to engage in behaviour unbecoming of an Englishperson*. And
then what will the Yanks think, eh?that would never do..
.
.
.
*I’m not English.
opposablethumbs:
So, Louis (if that’s your real name). I now have you trapped. Yes, the disguise is quite ingenious. You look like Louis, but your COMPOOTAH LITRATcy gives you away. You have tipped your hand, revealed your secrets, let the cat out of the bag, as it were.
Now I, the nefarious nigelTheBold, shall reveal to all your true identity!
/me rips latex mask from face
What? Your secret identity is Louis? What kind of chicanery is this? You disguised yourself as yourself?
Ingenious, Sir. Most ingenious indeed. A double-double-blind. Misdirection at its finest.
You, Sir, are free to go.
I may pout a little. Or allow my stiff upper lip to wobble slightly. Possibly even become miffed.
Right. I’m going to pop out now, and when I get back I expect to find that all this ::makes gesture encompassing Louis’ unconscionably devious disguising of himself as himself, together with own abject failure to either work out or elicit details as to where to put sekret text:: has been resolved. Lolcat-based weaponry systems and/or tardigrades will be optimistically scrutinised.
To the Rt. Hon. opposablethumbs,
Dear Sir,
We have been reliably informed that you have made the following statement.
If you indulge in such unseemly behaviour then we shall be forced to take steps. You shall be dismissed from your club, your portrait shall be turned to the wall, and it will be strongly recommended that you emigrate to New South Wales.
I remain, Sir, your most humble and obedient servant,
Sir Runcible Spoon, KCB, MC, JP, L, etc.
Hon. Sec. for the Powers that Be
I return!
I return to inform and enlighten!
I return to polemicise and satirise!
And my identity…..
Louis
Dear Sir Runcible Spoon,
Pursuant to your missive #524 of the 5th of April 2012, might I humbly suggest the following amendments.
Firstly, that, in addition to being dismissed from his club, the Hon. Gentleman to whom your missive is directed be deemed “unclubbable” should his unseemly behaviour be perpetrated for more than one standard minute.
Secondly, that the Hon. Gentleman to whom your missive is directed have his hat taken from his person and rendered inoperable by dint of physical violence.
Thirdly, and finally, that the Hon. Gentleman to whom your missive is directed be encouraged to Queensland as opposed to New South Wales. After all, it is all the Queen’s land.
In anticipation of your prompt reply,
Yours &c.
Colonel Arthur Fortesque Bigott-Smythe (Retd.) KCVO, DSc, KG, EIEIO
@ opposableTHUMBS
{theophontes tries to read comment, is overwhelmed by the LEGALESE, decides to go back and change the original “@ opposable” to “@ opposablethumbs” to avoid possible litigation}
Ooops, sorry … I owe you a thumb. {reaches into large box behind desk. lobs thumb up thread in compensation}
…
{looks at comment before posting. decides to put “THUMBS” in all caps, just in case}
SHOWING ON A SCREEN NEAR YOU.
I would like to deal with two references first and then ask the evols of evolution to deal with the C14 debate on a question basis.
The first reference is to a subject that has been dealt with in prior blogs (special note to the the ONE that knows everything). It is a site that has no creationist or religious input, except for the part the Vatican plays in giving evidence of the shroud. As stated before, one of the most studied artefacts, commented on by scientists. Debunks some of the above blogs.
Reference 01 : The Biggest Radiocarbon Dating Mistake Ever – InnoVal Systems … http://www.innoval.com/C14/
The second reference is in the same vein as to many questions I would want to pose. Being inundated in the past few days of a feathered T-Rex, camp-fires in caves in South Africa are now 1 million years old (not 700 000, which explains our art at braai-ing), club feet that show homo-erectus could stand up and a radio jock that is heading for a challenge.
Reference 02 : Problems with Radiometric and Carbon-14 Dating … http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html
Preference being from writing essays and multiple responses, this would theoretically be my first question phrased :
Question 01 : Can you please explain to me how C14 has maintained a consistency over 40/50/60 thousand years? What changed then to cause an inconsistency in your calculations? If life can come from the lifeless, how can the particular chemicals you require stay constant over billions of years? And in the half life, how is it that that particular chemical is replenished in equalibrium between the 3/4…1/4 phase with no outside influences affecting it? Obviously you can replicate in a lab, solar flares, meteorites, natural disasters, nature itself, the Earths orbit, chemical wear and tear over eons, weather and all the simple facts that we do not have answers for now (not in our life-time), but still have to learn about. So, to simplify the question, how is the one in a trillion parts per million concept across the whole planet accepted as the absolute given accuracy as a constant that has no variables?
P.S. A quote from reference 01.
It is the wrong answer because it denies the student a chance to look at the methods, procedures and data, and to learn from the experience.
Now would be a good time to tell me how stupid and ignorant I am, how much I lie and how incoherent my ‘aingelaise’ is.
TO David Marjanović
Delusional, yip…yip…yip. Never learnt to chew bones.
Gabba to fabba wabba? Gingle?
Ahhhh fongle bangle wangle! Bibber. Bibber te goat. GOAT! TWIGOAT!
Fabba goat wangler.
Louis
Well, that pretty much was the first answer expected.
Not very representative, depending on the portion of the responses which I am sure will be ….
Hmm. If that’s what you want, I can do that!
Dear Danielhaven,
You are stupid, dishonest and ignorant. Your comments don’t make the slightest bit of sense. Also, your english is terrible.
I hope this was to your satisfaction and I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Pentatomid
{Mutters} Fabba goat wangler.
Dibbluh. Go dibbluh. Bingley bingley osh cannok hary gong ength. Bork bork vry ungerth barkle dibbluh.
Fabba schlup on fabba goat wangler.
Louis
[Meta] Try and out surreal me, creationist motherfucker, I’ll cut your balls off. I haven’t even started. I’ve already replied twice using carrier pigeons and small hand-crafted jewel cases made from illegal materials. Don’t make me come back there and wardrobe.
Louis
Yawn, fuckwitted papers from religious idiots who think they are making inane excuses (ie, lying) for their imaginary deity. Nothing not already seen and refuted by real scientists without any agenda other than that of the truth. And the truth is that the shroud is a medieval fraud, and even the RCC knows that. Anybody who thinks otherwise must presuppose their conclusion rather than base it on the facts. The cloth is medieval in age, the image can be duplicated, and there is nothing about it that shows divine will upon it.
Nothing but bafflegabble presented by DH. No hard and conclusive physcal evidence in those papers. Typical of liars and bullshitters with nothing but OPINION, which can’t refute the physical evidence, but they must make an effort in any case to protect their omnipotent deity from being seen as powerless. Since your deity doesn’t exist DH, there is no problem with it being seen as powerless. All imaginary things are powerless.
@ DH666
Rather than wasting time addressing David in this way, you should rather direct well thought out queries to him. If there is anyone capable of helping you understand your questions, he is one of the best.
Zrom! Zrom, Louis!
Queeeble paloom goat wangler meppo Danielhaven?
How dare you, Sir. I demand a full retraction at once or, I fear, you shall feel the back of my hand. Or, possibly, the front, as well.
danielhaven: Republic Reston fatalities lack of these ebola virus disease occurred in a the morted importality in humans, with the United the cause species, Zaire ebolated back pain, and a last can Africa cause of ebola virulenty morrhage, bleeding at to consisten the Demorrhagic headache more five, bleeding size are outbreat twent species, the United three species of ebolation species in the minimalaisease imported States peak, these epidemics of weeks (2). Sincern in humans) Republic health factors. Two the Un
Methinks danielhaven is spending too much time on the ‘rama lamb a dingdong.’
er, danielhaven, you do know that C14 dating is only good to about 60k years. So why bring in something redated from 1 million to 700,000 years ago? Is it to show us that you really have no clue about radiometric dating?
danielhaven:
Wait, there’s a C14 debate? I thought the physics and chemistry of the C14 decay process was worked out many decades ago?
What kind of debate could one possibly bring to…
Oh, a manufactured debate. A debate constructed from sources that mislead, misunderstand, misdirect, or outright lie. That kind of debate.
I used to have those kinds of debates when I was 12, where I’d just make shit up. I’m glad to see the artform hasn’t died.
@ DH666
From your pseudo-scientific linky:
Oookaaaay…. Suppose for the sake of argument this where true … (I am not saying it is and it would appear clear that the writer/s have a heavenly agenda.) … How the fuck does anyone imagine that this proves anything about jeebus? Do the mummies of the pharoahs (which we happen to know ARE real) somehow manage to prove that Seth or Osiris was real? Would you start believing in Horus if I can date a mummies shroud to the time when religious liars claim he was the only begotten son of
YHWHOsiris?Well #535, the ONE that knows it all.
He was there, with all the other scientists, proved the garbage he continually spews out in a litany of profound language and insults to those who the ONE (the so-called peer) refers to as his peers. Any bet, the peers he is ridiculing would not give him the day or time in any conversation. Do you actually realise that you are denigrating your so-called own? How low?
TO theophontes 777
Where a lot of the conversation has been multi-directional, with stale [billions of years old] comments being posted by the ONE and others, those who can…should. I meant no disrespect to David but was just answering a previous comment. If there is a positive to come from David’s contribution then that would actually add substance. As for the ONE who has feathers now, limited vocabulary and far too many chemicals in him, the ability to read and comprehend is probably still a million years away.
P.S. And dem dere guns should be better kept in dem dere pockets
While we’re waiting for the answers to danielhaven’s questions, it appears reasonable that he is uniquely qualified to answer some questions I’ve pondered about years:
Who put the bomp in the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?
Who put the ram n the rama lama ding dong?
Who put the bop n the bop shoo bop shoo bop?
Who put the dip in the dip da dip da dip?
Who was that man?
I ask because I’d like to shake his hand. He made my baby fall in love with me.
TO nitwitlovesjesus1988
There has been much said chocolaty about responsive genophyres, but little to support superflecting radial redolence. All evo of evolutionists have ignored the extrinsic functional perturbations of drifting of genetics, for example. You cannot with confidence say your trust in observation adheres to the mousse. In fact, the inference of empiricism disclaims full liability!
And if you cannot refute that (which I am ascertain you cannot), you must surely remove the penguin from your pocket, and stick it back in a vest and cummerbund with those little tasty-eyed speckles.
But Daniel, a lobster ate my penny farthing so I couldn’t come back in time for lampshade. See?
@ Louis, pentamoid, A.R, DH666
I am impressed how you have all mastered the technical language of Intellectual Xtians ™ . However this all goes way over my head .
pentatomid:
Not even for lascivious nutter butter? Oh, you poor glockenspiel!
Oh, DH666, we might be able to get a friend for you talk to here...
{A. R gives secret ellipsis nod and wink}
Actually the Shroud of Turin contradicts the Bible. John 20:6-7 says there were two cloths involved:
Working from the bottom up
TO theophontes 777
Stop taking things out of context to prove a ‘revised’ point. Misrepresenting anything leads to all the variations history has seen and is still seeing.
To nigelTheBold to the power of nigelTheBold
Glad you still believe in the sherbet you did at 12. Obviously never came up till now. If the references are ancient [in your world-view], the question is not.
TO Ogvorbis (no relation to the Ogg family)
Umm, I know it is only stated that it equates to 40/50/60 thousand years (according to the theory)…which is actually in my question 01.
The point was the feathered T-Rex, camp-fires, etc in your whole aging system [particularly when observation was made that the Earth was life-less].
To louis and pentatomid
Eiw kiltnie eeg mo???????????????
To Sir Runcible Spoon, KCB, MC, JP, L, etc.; Colonel Arthur Fortesque Bigott-Smythe (Retd.) KCVO, DSc, KG, EIEIO; theophontes 777 and honourable tardigrades; my lids, ladles and jellyspoons.
ahem
Whilst naturally enjoying a considerable common genetic heritage and a faint ressemblance thereto I am not in fact a baby seal and am therefore quite unclubbable (outwith the Riding of East Yorkshire, of course).
I shall take my yet operable hat and my leave for the nonce, replete with the full complement of thumbs (and musing upon why it is so much easier (and more rewarding) to read Louis and pentatomid than dh).
::flourishes hat in sweeping obeisance, allowing its plume almost to brush the floor, sweeps crimson-lined cape over shoulder, arranges defensive lines of railway shares, smiles and soap, and oxford commas, and softly and suddenl::
TO ‘Tis Himself
Think and meditate on that, as an open-minded person.
@ DH666
Well, I do think that Nerd has a very valid point. You are wasting a lot of energy seeking out old, refuted and rather prejudiced writings wrt carbon dating. Could you present any evidence (either way) wrt the shroud of Turin, that is presented by qualified investigators without an agenda? Surely not everyone on the planet has a horse in this race?
I will happily believe in your imaginary skygod. The only proviso is that I have sufficient credible evidence to not have to rely on brute belief.
(Currently, I have more evidence for Almighty Zeus than for Imaginary YHWH. Perhaps you xtians are just not trying hard enough.)
TO opposablethumbs
No answer for you and skip my postings…..please
danielhaven:
The problem is that the question has already been answered. Years ago. Long before you were born. If you (or the site to which you linked) had any clue how radiocarbon dating works, it wouldn’t be a question.
You are relying on websites that intentionally distort reality to fit their religious biases. If you had any interest at all in the truth, rather than in a misrepresentation of the truth that fits your religious beliefs, you’d not fact-search on sites that provide intentionally-incorrect facts (that is, lies).
As it is, you show no indication you desire to know the truth. You’d rather have convenient lies.
Start here, and follow the references, if you truly wish to know how radiocarbon dating works.
danielhaven #553
I have thought about it. The Bible itself says the Shroud of Turin is a fake.
Think and try to weasel out of that, as a deluded godbot.
@ DH666
Aaaah! Those lying historians are lying! THEREFORE JEEEBUS!!1!!elebenty!!!
(Yes, I can also speak xtian. It’s just that I am not convinced by it. Next you will be telling me GAWD planted the fossils to fool unbelievers and that carbon dating is not reliable … oh wait … you have done that already.)
Perhaps you could expand a bit on what it is you are actually asking. Tyranosaurus rex, along with other maniraptoran and alverezsaurid therapods did have feathers. Campfires are a human invention and date to within the last couple of hundred thousand years (no idea what the current evidence is on this, but you can use Google, danielhaven). The aging system? I have no idea what you mean by this. And yes, there was a time, the Hadean, when the earth was lifeless.
So please rephrase your question in coherent English and maybe one of us will be able to answer.
Oh, lookie, fuckwitted and demented unthinking idjit can’t understand that ANY element with a radioactive isotope can be used for dating. Seems to be unaware that carbon-14 is only used to about 50,000 years old, but then switches over to other elements and isotopes for older ages. Life isn’t needed for for almost all dating, as no carbon is involved. One of the favorite methods of dating is potassium-40/argon-40. This is often used with volcanic tuffs, where the high temperature of the eruption melts the rock, releasing any argon present, and resetting the radiometric clock when the glass solidifies. This can be used to measure above and below layers of sediments or fossils, allowing for a age between the two to represent the age of the sediment or fossils.
The idjit also thinks that a deeply religious scientist wouldn’t lie to justify their beliefs in the stupornatural. They do, and if publish such ramblings, like the articles the incoherent idjit cited, they are looked down upon and ignored by their peers, as real science is lacking in such papers.
NigelTheBold @548
No, not even for lascivious nutter butter, sadly. You see, my skis weren’t waterproof (which is inconvenient at the best of times).
The efficacy of radiocarbon dating has been proven time and again. It’s not like we just use radiocarbon dating alone. For instance, using tree samples that go back tens of thousands of years (and verifiably so, by matching up ring patterns), we have tested the practicality and accuracy of radiocarbon dating.
It’s not like these questions have never come up before, DH. RC dating isn’t just something someone pulled out of their ass one day. It’s based on the same physics that produced nuclear power and the atomic bomb. This is stuff we know, and know quite well. It’s not like you’re asking questions about the origins of life. It’s more like you’re questioning the validity of general relativity.
pentatomid @561:
Well, you have my deepest and most heart-felt rock salt.
@ Pharyngulites
I have been arguing on this xtian site: Link to Thinking Xtian
If anyone is feeling energetic, they can respond to:
If you can, drag one or two over here, so that Daniel does not feel lonely.
TO theophontes 777
Serious ratings drop. You post for me or others to read and yet you do not read properly. WRT, this is still a very current discussion amongst scientists. With me, it is not. The point was more that nothing in my faith had been tested scientifically [as claimed by the ONE] and I never wanted to even go down that route,similar to quoting. I have stated my simple disagreement and from that point, many people’s imaginations stretch further than the unending universe.
The only simple belief a person needs is that there is something more than just me or you.
If this viewpoint of no accountability here on earth permeates through, how do you not envisage an ending of desolation once the masses decide, “Why must we suffer?”. Then global warming is meaningless, the connected will survive for a while, then the ruthless will survive for a while and then this planet would become lifeless.
In your scientific thoughts, what makes you think (if there is other life out there), that we were first, we are looking for bacteria but if they were first to form from the big-bang, they fly by us with no contact or are searching for us?
And when you put your big picture together with my big picture, the purity of science is not the only answer but part of the big picture.
That you need it :
1) Does not make it true
2) Doesn’t mean everybody needs it. I don’t for instance.
Still with the childish nihilism of strawmen atheists.
Why oh why must everything of value to you be forever ? Why must there be more to a universe you have barely glanced at ? It’s like asking for another gift when there’s an untouched pile of them in your living room.
Ideas that make you warm, fuzzy and safe inside don’t change reality and might even harm you. The universe doesn’t and cannot care about us. Life is a constant battle that we all eventually lose. It doesn’t make it worthless to me. It makes it precious and unique.
Your “big picture” simply contains useless noise. Religions don’t add anything to knowledge, morals or happiness. The only thing they manage to do is substract to them.
Sorry DH, that is you not reading properly. You haven’t from your first posts. Makes you sound incoherent.
That has to be a delusional belief, as there is absolutely no evidence for anything more. Unless you have an eternally burning bush to present…
Accountable to what? You presuppose, but there is no evidence for your delusion, but you keep rambling inanely about it anyway. You lack the accountability that comes with facing reality. Your head is up your ass.
Nothing cogent in this rambling statement of what you think is nihilism. But your inablity to face reality is the real nihilism. Keep your head buried up your ass and take no action to make life a little easier for your grandchildren and beyond.
What big picture that you have? You have nothing but delusions. YOu aren’t reality based. You have no big picture, just your imaginary deity and mythical/fictional babble. Nothing big about those delusions. They keep you small, and your picture small.
Is there life elsewhere in the universe? Almost a certainty. Nothing remarkable about the Earth, except maybe the lack of super nova in the neighborhood. Are they doing something similar to our Project SETI? Most likely, if they are sufficiently advanced. But you haven’t been listening to the reality of interstellar travel. Given the distances and energy requirements, the likelyhood of any travel to other solar systems is almost impossible. There might be some type of science fiction drive that would allow for FTL travel, but, like you say, if it were there, they would be here.
Two important words there.
simple
and belief.
no no no DH @565
I cued yec123 for the nihilistic atheist argument over on the creation history thread, not you. You aren’t scheduled for nihilism for at least a few more iterations.
If someone comes on a biscuit I’m not the kind of fool to eat it. Never play spunky biscuit in the Fives courts because if the stripes catch you you’ll get at least a week of EMRs and possibly a week of breakers.
And no one wants that.
Louis
P.S. If anyone knows those terms, they will know which school I went to…
DH:
What “big picture?” The picture of how you wish the universe to be? Your own interpretation of reality?
That’s all subjective, mate. That’s all stuff in your head.
Science is the only method we have to accurately model reality. It’s our only objective way of seeing the big picture. Science isn’t strictly part of the big picture, but it’s the only thing we’ve got to help us figure out what the big picture really is.
If you have an epistemology other than science that is capable of revealing the nature of reality, I’d love to hear it.
Louis: You really want to avoid any of the spunky getting on your morning coat too.
A.R.
Close, so close, but I did not go to Eton.
Other boarding schools in the UK play Eton Fives. Good call though. Also I believe Eton to have Praepostors and not Stripes.
Louis
Yep, they’re called Praepostors at Eton, but some people call them stripes.
TO ‘Tis Himself
Not true, The Bible does not say that at all.
To theophontes 777
To set facts straight, I never said God planted fossils. Pretty much the same as a Semi- being ripped up in a tornado. Those fossils are your dem den bones!
TO Ogvorbis (no relation to the Ogg family)
T-Rex was always covered in feathers and felt as fluffy as a wooly mammoth, Not just here and there but very dissimilar to the bald heads of today. Gee, someone should have told Mr Spielberg.
Camp-fires just expanded by 300 000 years on a find in a cave. Obviously, if there was a mark outside a cave that dated 2 million years ago that would have weathered/washed away, this is an important find.
The Ageing System – You can only go so far on one (40/50/60) without answering that any deviation could occur, now you want people to believe in billions from a big-bang, abio-genesis and bones you found in rocks (Oh wait DH, you forgot the strands of DNA stuck in a rock that created life from a meteorite).
To the ONE who knows everything, OM
Augh…and he cannot read first said or the reply to the dumb reply to the 40/50/60 so he adds his scientific two pence.
Previous blogs,,,”All scientists, many scientists, peers”. Now those scientists that are deeply religious, published more papers than you can spell, are wrong..HWHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.
Your claim to fame is not science but rather the flea on the end of the dogs tail. To claim all scientists are honest and only deeply religious scientists lie, puts you where? Do they know more or do you?
But don’t worry, keep your blinkers on and trust in the god you believe you are and as our [close to/last] last conversation, I wish you the best.
TO nigelTheBold to the power of nigelTheBold
The question has been answered long ago…so it should be easy to copy and paste. The fact that you too look down at other scientists, begs me to ask the question of what a layman should read and what a layman should believe.
Let’s go with tree samples/Ice rings/DAH DAH DAH
You can answer the question for yourself….
Two twin dinosaurs are born 75 million years ago, one male and one female. The female is sickly and suffers from colic, eats very little, lies in the cave and sleeps lots. The male eats everything within sight, walks to the next feeding point and sleeps a lot. They both die/flattened/frozen/specially kept for records at the same time. How close would you date them?
You are afforded your privilege of believing big-bang/abio-genesis/evolution by the same that I am afforded the privilege of believing in my God.
Is this really what we are doing for the benefit of future generations? Or are we cantankerous, obstinate and declare that there is a ONE amongst us that knows it all? Or worse even, ONE that agrees with ONE?
P.S. To even contemplate that maths or science was under threat from christianity would explain the need for the battle you guys believe you have to wage. It fits in the battle against many institutions [Religion, Government{irs/sars/taxes}, Army, Wall Street, etc, Crime and much more). THERE ARE JUST SIMPLY MORE IMPORTANT THINGS RIGHT NOW – WORLD-WIDE.
Ta-Dah
DanielHaven, DH666, Zombie, Chew-toy and idjit (use all the letters as many times as you can for the rest I have been called)
^ This is missing “Goats On Fire!”
I apologise but while writing #575, I missed one important blog from the ONE who knows everything.
Two quotes :
“almost impossible” – sort of explains itself!!!!
“There might be some type of science fiction drive that would allow for FTL travel, but, like you say, if it were there, they would be here.” – Blow me over and knock me down, three words I will treasure.
theophontes: Argh...
danielhaven:
What we know about the past can change with each new discovery. Same for any science. A schlock movie director could not predict a discovery that would be made a decade later, therefore science is wrong? Are you out of your mind? Findings are argued and reinterpreted all the time. That is what science is. There is no holey book sent down from the past which supposedly has all the answers.
TO Ogvorbis (no relation to the Ogg family)
The so-called schlock movie director cannot know what a decade later may produce but not being a schlock, presents an image as you say it is at the time and then you next so-called schlock movie director has to add feathers and your whole audience is sitting there convinced of what….? The so-called schlock movie director’s have no clue or the people giving them information to make their movies factual to make the movie accurate have no clue? And guess what, tomorrow it could be fur and not feathers. Or, which I would have gone with was a variation of species, some had feathers and some had scales and some had whatever. It is not science that is wrong but the image of science portrayed.
While there is a huge majority of accuracy in science, this “may, leads back to, hindsight, probable, theory, possible, only, probable, wannabees” and much more of Oxford, the so-called FINDINGS and RE-INTERPRETATIONS do lead to new discoveries but does not make certain theories/assumptions FACT.
And as previously said, ride goat from on behind without shoe-string
AH! kemist at #566
I apolgise for missing your comments (I wish I could blame the many internets, but I can’t).
So your “2)” means you only need you. In the reference, the ‘me’ could be anyone and everyone.
“Life is a constant battle that we all eventually lose” – And for the majority that is deemed not to be contributing, what does that mean? You are actually giving less meaning to life for the majority of the Earth’s population.
I believe I am not in a constant battle about life but it is a constant that some you win and some you lose here.
And if your picture is “precious and unique”, then your picture is not far from mine.
I quoted from the fucking Bible, asshole. It’s not my fault you can’t fucking read or think.
BLARGLE!
Verily I say to thee, that thou art fondling a maple tree. And then when all thy work is done, please place that tree within your bum.
Rum tiddle tiddle rum tiddle tiddle toorah toorahyay.
Louis
I read the bible once.
Then I whacked off onto the cover, splatted it together with a pre-jizzed koran and a spunky torah to make a massive Judeo-Christian-Islamic jitler moistened papier mache ball which I shaped into a giant phallus and used to fuck Tom Cruise in the arse.
True story.
Mmmmm surpries sacrilicious scientologist bum secks.
I can make as much sense as Daniel! Look at me! Look at me!
Louis
I’m not sure. Have I made it clear yet that I do not, and never will, take anything Daniel Haven says remotely seriously?
The guy is typing one handed and dribbling whilst doing it. Seriously, I can shit better creationists than this.
Louis
I’ve invited LFAAPN to TZT.
@A.R.
No you haven’t. Link borked.
No! That would be Ice #9. See also: Ice #9. Plan 9 is an OS.
—
opposablethumbs:
World is suddener and crazier than we fancy i
(Oh! I sent music scores. Did kid get the gig?)
—
It was nearly BRA. But they just wanna rock you.
—
You missed “WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON BESTIALITY?”. After that, everything else has been a let-down.
—
Lest anyone say my music tastes are weird, here’s something more normal:
Scarlatti Sonata K. 119 in D major
(I have Haydn in reserve. Haydn’s bonkers.)
pj: Oh, well. Not like I wanted to read anymore of his shit again anyway.
Actually it does, as science is asymptotically approaching facts, whereas your imaginary deity and mythical/fictional holy book are way the hell out in lies and bullshit land, with no hope of getting close to anything factual or even the truth. We know that. You are too incoherent to see reality in front of you.
Nothing precious and unique here on Earth. Your delusions keep on rolling in? What next, you are superior to all women???
DH:
Rather than cutting and pasting, I provided a link. Much easier for you to follow, and doesn’t bore everyone else. Did you bother to follow the link? Did you bother to understand it?
No. I thought not.
Considering dinos are dated by the strata in which they are found (among other methods), we’d date them pretty much as contemporaries. Your whole dietary scenario is superfluous, even irrelevant. I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to get at.
Hardly. My “belief” is based on our best knowledge, based on our most precise observations. My “belief” is fungible, in that if I am wrong in the specifics, there is something with equal or greater explanatory power to take its place. The best knowledge I have may be replaced by observation.
Your beliefs are based not on observation, but on faith. This is at odds with reality, in that it is not based on reality, but mythology and wishful thinking. I can demonstrate where your mythology deviates from observed reality, but you’ve shown you don’t give a fuck. You’d rather follow your mythology than observed reality.
No, my delusional friend. My privilege of belief is not the same as yours. I am privileged with knowledge gained through observation and logic. You are privileged with faith garnered through generations of theocratic control. Our situations are not in any way similar.
You go on and believe that, though, if it makes you feel better.
DH:
You don’t have to know all that is right to know one thing that is wrong. And the Christian faith is wrong.
We don’t have to know everything to know certain things. To assume absolute knowledge is necessary for understanding is unrealistic, even insane. I don’t have to know what my wife does every minute of every day to know she loves me. I don’t have to know the paths of all asteroids to know I am most likely not going to be killed by a meteor tomorrow. I can also be quite positive I would die if I jumped off a tall building, without knowing the subtleties of general relativity.
You are the one declaring absolute knowledge, not us. You are the one claiming some sort of epistemic privilege, not us. So if there is arrogance in knowledge, it is with you.
Choose to ignore the evidence of reality all you want. Just don’t make it into some sort of noble cause. Willful ignorance is not noble.
It’s just pathetic.
hmm. usually theophontes makes an appearance about now.
@ A.R
{the scarlet pimpernel, theophontes, bounds across the stage (in flowing cape and nought else)}
TADAAAH!
{looks flustered for a few seconds, then recalls lines}
{Imagines a nude tardigrade in a cape} :shudder:
Oh, it looks like this thread is going to get it in the head soon. Thus I propose outfitting it with this cyberweapon-proof helmet! Try firing your cyperweapory through that PZ!
TO nigelTheBold to the power of nigelTheBold
Observation and logic.
Saw a tom thumb cracker explode and pieces of paper were lying around…there we got it…the proof we needed for the big bang.
Observation and logic.
Observation and logic.
Observation and logic.
@ DH666
We have discussed this before. I agree that there is something more:
Who is talking about “no accountability”? We are accountable to each other not to an imaginary deity (of which there are many better than your YHWH). You, of all people, should have some conception of Ubuntu.
Nobody knows this. It is merely speculation on your part. I can only respond to your question when presented with credible information proving that this is indeed the case.
Wait… When we combine science with gibberish we get what?
@ Louis
I have heard of “spunky biscuit” mentioned in The Cape Colony.
@ DH 666 # 575 etc
I have not accused you of saying that. But many other xtians of like stripe do say shit like that. It is a mere step more delusional than believing carbon dating is crap.
No, they are not necessarily wrong. People can be delusional and also produce good science. They do this by not letting their delusions run away with them.
Christianity poses no challenge nor danger to mathematics or science per se. What it does is undermine mathematics and science education (amongst many other ills).
You seem too concerned with Teh Truth ™ . Scientists are a little more pragmatic. Gradually approaching the truth (small t) is the more practicable approach.
Awww, cute. You are such a unique little snowflake.
TO theophontes 777
“Who is talking about “no accountability”? ” Yip, still waiting for the Athiests guide to Morals…..
“Ubuntu” – Yip, works but there is also the realty of a crime riddled world. And each time you think you heard or seen it all, a new shock story evolves.
Christianity does not undermine Mathematics or Science. That is your delusion.
I am not too concerned, I am very comfortable with my faith.
P.S. not so little but thanks for the sweet remark
Oh look, a lackwit.
Those killed and tortured for challenging the interpretations of natural phenomena given in holy books might beg to differ. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the period immediately following Christianity becoming the state religion in the Roman Empire in the 4th century. It lasted for 1000 years, when St Augustine declared that all we need to know about nature is in the Bible, and it is called the Dark Ages for a reason. Thankfully humans are curious creatures, and you can only watch a boat sail disappear on the horizon so often before you ask yourself whether the earth really can be flat.
@ DH666
Are the gods (in your case the bloodthirsty YHWH) laws moral because they happen to say so, or do we judge them moral from a humanist (ie not goddist) perspective? How can we say that YHWH gives moral guidance without knowing what morality is? YHWH gives instructions for murdering people who work on a sunday (that includes you by the way) and for killing upstart teenagers who give their parents lip. In what way are these instructions moral?
Atheists tend to follow humanist values when it comes to morals. (So do a lot of well meaning xtians. They seem rather blind to the contradiction that arises though.)
In what way does the philosophy of Ubuntu lead to crime? Should we not rather say that antisocial behaviour occures in spite of the calls to social consciousness and mutual respect.
We have had the recent case in South Africa (on TZT nogal) of a teacher losing her job for trying to teach science in school. How can the xtian attack on science education not undermine mathematics and science? (Hint: No science education ==> no more scientists in future. This is what many xtians are trying to achieve.)
I am sure you are. I would suggest that you do not indoctrinate your (grand) children to be as ignorant though. You really are missing out on the best of life by being ignorant of reality.
That remark was not meant to feed your delusion, but rather to help you question it.
DH666:
But mathematics and science do undermine Christianity.
@ John Morales
Indeed. The very reason the goddists so frantically want to attack the teaching of these subjects in the classroom.
(It is particularly amusing how the religious launch their attacks by way of the internet. WTF? Do they ever stop to think about the stupid contradictions they live. Bit like sawing off the branch one is standing on. They will keep being obtuse until it is too late.)
Since there is a concerted campaign to insinuate creationst idiocy and lies into science classrooms, the threat is quite clear.
Still waiting for something other than OPINION from the delusional and incoherent fuckwit. Your OPINION DH is not that of an expert giving testament, but rather that of a confused idjit mewling his ignorance to the world, and expecting to be applauded as giving cogent, rather than incoherent, explanations.
You haven’t refuted ANY science, which requires more science. That is done by citing the peer reviewed scientific literature. In fact, the only literature you cited was fuckwitted scientists who had to believe the medieval shroud of Turin is real, and corrupted real science and diminished their reputations to zero in a vain attempt to excuse the fact the shroud is proven fake.
You haven’t caused any doubt on radiometric dating or even carbon dating. Your skepticism and OPINION on the subject is irrelevant to science, and your testament is not evidence. Evidence comes from the peer reviewed scientific literature, not your mouth. Science doesn’t give a flying fuck about you and your inane and incoherent OPINIONS. You failed in demonstrating anything other than you will lie and bullshit for your delusional unevidenced beliefs. Typical and sad specimen. Arrogant and egotistical beyond belief, and stopped learning due to terminal religious stupidity. And you think the world wants to hear from you. The world wants you to shut the fuck up as you bore it to death with insipid verbiage.
To theophontes 777
What a load of blerry utter rubbish. The teacher story has nothing to do with science but rather the drivel your famous Charle thought up, without observation or experimentation.
O.K. then, what is the humanist moral list as purported by the evols of evolution? I would believe from previous postings that every scientist is honest except for those who they have a pre-conceived idea by the evols of having a hidden religious agenda as being well in your top ten.
As for my children and grand-children, the choice is purely teirs, the same as the choice was purely mine.
As for again twisting ubuntu and crime, it’s no wonder some have doubts.
TO John Morales
Here you were put on a pedestal, and you come up with maths and science undermines christianity. Your belief is from nothing or a dot smaller than the period on your screen, billions of years, perfect timing, you are just here to add to the next layer.
Oh, and enforce a theory, hypotheses, thought from a so-called intelligent base labelling others as ignorant. Or as some do, pretend superiority and write gibberish.
TO rorschach
Should not speak to yourself like that.
As with everything, perfection is unatainable. There are people who abuse whatever system they pretend to represent whether it be religion, science, government, cops, teachers, accountants, bankers, lawyers, judges, should I go on?
TO Nerd of Redhead
I have stated, you choose to ignore. I have asked and you choose to ignore.I have cited peer reviewed literature and you choose to ignore.
Seeing as you dig the lab so much, what is the replenish rate of C14 in the atmosphere over thousands of years?
My testament is not evidence to you but it is testament to why I have the faith. It really is a personal thing and I do not need peer review to acknowledge that I have faith in my beliefs.
TO KG
Do not know what school/uvi you went to but I was never taught religion/christianity in my maths or science classes.
@ DH666
Er…I think the title speaks for itself: Religion forces science teacher to quit
Did you ever even read the article? Come to mention it … did you ever even read the fucking bible (cover to cover) in the first place?
I had seen those papers ripped apart, as they should be, in Skeptical Inquirer years ago. You have the idea that all peer reviewed papers are equal. They aren’t. There is trash, and those papers you cited were trash.
This is totally and utterly incoherent. Evolution doesn’t have a morals, but animals who cooperate tend to more successful than those who are selfish. Humans just wrote it down tribal morals when writing was invented. Throw it into a book of mythology/fiction that describes an imaginary deity, and idjits like you think “god given” morals, rather than the tribal morals at the time the book was written.
Simple, Google and Wiki say how much is in the biosphere, but the rate is dependent on a number of factors, which is true. But then, you are hung up on a dating method that isn’t used that much, and is very reliable, as it is highly calibrated from tree ring and other data. And you haven’t refuted it with scientific evidence, just OPINION, which is worthless.
Then why are you continually blabbering your personal faith like it is something worthwhile, meaningful, and required for human experience? It is none of that, just your statement that you are a delusional fool, as you believe without evidence.
Your OPINION is meaningless. You don’t cite the real scientific literature. You are arrogant and egotistical to think your delusional OPINION isn’t trash.
ONCE YOU TRASH YOUR PEERS AND CALL THEIR SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TRASH THAT SHOULD BE RIPPED UP, YOU PRETTY MUCH HAVE ENDED ANY AND ALL CONVERSATION.
SO, GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL AND I AM ‘FOREVER BLOWING BUBBLES…’
P.S. CHECK OUT MY CHEETAHS EVERY NOW AND THEN.
THE IDJIT, CAVEMAN IS GONNA BRAAI NOW….YUM YUM.
DH666: There is no credible scientific evidence for your god. That’s it, end of story. Now go read something sciency to educate yourself.
@ Nerd
I think that DH666 does not have a working definition of what science actually is. He seems to think that it is an opinion. He seems to think that it is his opinion being measured against your opinion.
*sigh*
I have tried previously to point out that the most elementary day-to-day technology – the very stuff he is using right now, such as the internet , cell phone or car – is at odds with the crap in the babble. He choses instead to go completely out of his depth (perhaps under the mistaken belief that you (we) are equally out of our depth).
*sigh*
@danielhaven :
Whoah! No need to SHOUT mate!
Oh & wasn’t Bubbles Michael Jackson’s pet chimpanzee?
What are you off doing then – bestiality!?
BTW. See :
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/
Aussie TV show Q&A is hosting a showdown between Richard Dawkins & Catholic Cardinal homophobe and general tosspot George Pell. Should be great veiwing and they let everyone ask questions via webform and webcast and facebok and other things – like being in the studio too.
Figured folks here might be interested ..
WHY WON’T YOU DIE?