1001. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165598 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 6:54 pm

Geodesic! Holy shit! That guy's organization www.endtime.com used to be based in my hometown!
Irvin Baxter! Small world. I called into his show a few times and took him to task for his goofy bullshit.

1002. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165597 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 6:50 pm

I'm not sure Navyjake is for real. Though I suppose he could be. We are getting trolled like mad these days by all manner of theist.

1003. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165581 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 6:04 pm

TheTruthID,
I think an ID theorist such as yourself would have some cogent explanation for the arrangement of the fossils in the strata. I mean why are there no rabbit fossils in the pre-cambrian strata? What do you even expect of a fossil record? What should it show and why? I would expect you to have an explanation of why it is the simplest forms are found in the oldest rock and progressively more complex as we move forward in time. And why can we so precisely predict where we might find certain developments in the fossil record.

Shubin et al put this predictablity to work for them with their ground breaking find of tiktaalik when they were looking for the origin of hands. They knew, based on other findings that somewhere between time x (no hand template) and time y(clear hand template) there must be some intermediate forms between the two periods. They estimated a 15 million year window, looked for sights of the appropriate age and strangely they found tiktaalik. A fish with the first rudiments of hands and fingers and wrist. Why should this be the case? At all? Why should the fossil record conform so narrowly to an evolutionary expectation. WHy should it yeild important finds to such a precise prediction?

Does ID have anything to say? It doesn't. All you have is the negative campaign, and the imagined shortfalls of modern evolutionary theory. By all means if you have some novel finding, go and get it published. But please don't come in here being beligerant and insulting.

1004. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165371 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Jac12358,

If David decides to respond he will not address a single substative point. He will make heavy weather of the any vitriol and play the victim. This is his method.

It is disengeious, as his blanket attacks in his own letter to the hurt jewish guy amply demonstrate. In fact he didn't really wish to make his case for theology but rather just imply that it was again atheist who is the problem and imply the only option is his religion. This is strangely the same tactic of the ID/creationsist studies folk. DR only offers the false dichotomy and not much of substance.

It is for this reason people tire of him, and get uh..."short" with him.

1005. Pope's Views on Science Invoke Spirited Debate

Comment #165352 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 11:38 am

What struck me with the tone of the article was its spin.
The pope is percieved as negative-x, but wait he's really Mr. Reasonable.

And the level of critique is appauling. I mean the question I asked, one of many, "Why does this guy need a palace?"

Vaal's point about the right and reasonable Church's action against Galieo also seems so obvious that any reporter ought to have pointed out exactly what the Church's actions were. Where is the discussion of this assertion? Again, Pope Benedict is negative-x but wait....

Fucking strange.

1006. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165342 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 11:21 am

Mphil,
Excellent rebuttal to DR.

1007. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165330 by MaxD on April 21, 2008 at 10:56 am

David,
It seems that the main point though is that Hitler wasn't a Darwinist. He never mentions Darwin, never discusses natural selection. Never gives credit to Darwin for the initial instantiation of the idea. The idea of breeds of human, and mixed blood etc was in the consciousness long before Darwin entered the fray. And that perculiar fascination with the Jews seems just a bit to Christian to me.

Dawkins language when discussing the nature of Hitler's belief and lack of the prefix un to accompany it probably stems from the fact that Hitler's own writings point to a very mixed, but somewhat supernatural picture. Dawkins mentions both Hitler's theistic mental meanderings and his disdain for Christianity as a whole in the TGD. However it is also clear that Hitler believed a lot of bizarre supernatural type things. So atheist cannot be the label we give him.
I suppose we could throw up our hands and say well, Hitler's thoughts on this issue are so mixed up we may never know. Based on what I have read-admittedly I am no historian- that agnosticism seems unnecessary. No one here has said that Hitler was a Christian. But that many people in Germany were professing Christians also seems in little doubt, nor does there seem room to doubt the idea that Germany's previous history of anti-semitism springing from its Christianity (Luthernism and Catholocism have a history of this strain of paranoia) was the spring board to National Socialist policies. Anti-semitism in Germany was well placed long before Darwin.

David, I think we would be here a very long time indeed if we were to catalogue all the things you don't know but think you know about the world. Take this completely confused line.

By the way I am not so sure that Social Darwinism is as dead as you suggest. Konrad Lorenz was an enthusiastic Nazi, J B S Haldane was a committed Stalinist and R A FIsher used to argue that civilisation was threatened because upper class women did not have enough basis - leaving the non- quality to breed. One of your own heroes Bill Hamilton certainly had a different take on morality and Darwinism. He once said that he had more sympathy for a lone fern than he did for a crying child. He argued for a radical programme of infanticide, eugenics and euthanasia to save the world. Genocide was the result of overbreeding and he would grieve for the death of one giant panda more than he would 'one hundred unknown Chinese'. Perhaps we should be glad that evolutionary biologists have finally caught up with the Zeitgeist but listening to the comments of Peter Singer, you will forgive me if I am more than a little concerned.

What is it you are trying to say. First you say you aren't sure Social Darwinism is dead and then you mention several people's thoughts on things decidedly not Social Darwinism. Do you mean any old social engineering scheme can be called Social Darwinism? Or are you refereing to what most people here think of as Herbert Spencerism? J.B.S. Haldane may indeed have been a Stalinist, but that has little to do with Social Darwinism (Spencer's version of said philosophy not whatever blanket charge David R is making). In any event Most of these people are the distant past, and perhaps more than a little bit the product of their times. And aren't you now doing a bit of the disingenuous thing you are constantly accusing all the members of this site. You will note in Haldane's day most people had some crackpot racist theory they abided by, especially in the upper crusts. But here you are doing what you always love to do. Mine the past for people who support your case.

You do this trick in the reverse as well when you trudge through history-oddly leaving out the modern era almost entirely-to find appropriately theistic scientists.

Anyway it is true that people can say lots of odd and weird things and justify numerous evil thoughts they already had by pulling ideas from other quarters. There is no doctrine though accompanying Darwin's dangerous idea. No divine revalation. Religions are quite different, though I needn't tell you this.

A point about Peter Singer. He is a philosopher and part of his job is to follow assumptions around and see where they lead. In my mind he is kind of a brave guy to go where he goes and then write about it for the rest of us to ponder. You'll have to point out why he worries you instead of just dropping out a line before anyone will be adequately able to address it. However, I can say he isn't a Social Darwinist at least as most people understand the term.

-MaxD

1008. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165005 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 11:26 pm

onlythingtofear,
You are simply here to incite some vitriol. Your tone is insulting, and not furthering debate. If you have a point make it. If not then go talk to your like minded friends and enjoy the world, well insulated from reality, you prefer to inhabit.

1009. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164960 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 10:20 pm

He will certainly get his wish if he keeps posting unsubstantiated jibberish.

1010. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164952 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 10:12 pm

Theonlythingtofear!
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, bwaaaaaaa......
Yes follow the money. Exactly. Because research scientist make so very much of that. I remember well my time as undergraduate working summers as a field biologist, the benjamins were rolling in. Every professor I met was bedecked as the most regal pimp.
Yeah follow the money.

1011. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164936 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 9:24 pm

Nothing of it. I just was remarking on your tone.

1012. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164934 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 9:21 pm

Karda,
I think all this God traveling back in time business may be interesting as the plot of a series of science fiction novels, say Dan Simmon's Hyperion Cantos, but why are you so convinced of it? I mean I enjoyed the books, that also contained numerous references to the Tlielhard that Epeeist made. Clearly I didn't enjoy them as much as you did.

Do you think this scenario of yours really characterizes reality? I mean doesn't it seem a wee bit non-parsimonious. Perhaps you are just offering possibliites and I have missed something.

1013. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164916 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 8:53 pm

Kardashovel is getting testy!

Contrary to your smarmy assertion that I have conceded the point, time does not care why the ends were moving so quickly relative to each other but only that they do so.

1014. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164906 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Bonzai,
I don't think that gene selection is an example of an influential dogma. Rather Sloan still has a lot of work ahead of him. I certainly remain unconvinced of the notion, simply because as described I don't think it distiguishable from stochastic processes. Time will tell if SWilson's model will bear research fruit.

Christopher Davis,
Don't sell yourself so short. I'm just stating what I think are some difficulties for any biological group related theories of evolution. I'm not saying it isn't possible. I just think that as yet there is no serious demonstration of such processes. When speaking of cultural strategies then the process becomes more likely. Here culturally transmitted tricks of survival may indeed outperform other groups so a trick will be adopted and spread, or non conformers would fade away.

1015. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164878 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 7:19 pm

Diacanu,
Do you forget the great wisdom from Conan, when he was asked what is best in life?
"To crush your enemies before you,
to see them driven before you,
and to hear the lamentation of their women."

Hopefully that will help you see the light about competition.

1016. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164875 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 7:15 pm

Steve Zara made my day with ESS (evolutionary stable strategies). I think what Christopher Davis may be talking about is culture because it certainly doesn't fit a workable model of evolutionary change that I know of.

1017. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164866 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 7:06 pm

Krauss's The Physics of Star Trek is a wonderful bit of fun. I'm glad to see it mentioned here. I would also like to recommend The Physics of Superheros by James Kaiklios. That too is an interesting window into physics and fiction. Fun stuff.

1018. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164835 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 6:27 pm

Christopher Davis,
You'll have to demonstrate how that would work at the genetic level which is the only way it can be justified as biological evolution.

It seems to me that empathy, and compassion can arise just fine in terms of individual level selection. And clearly we needn't venture very far mentally to see out this works out in parent offspring interactions. Sometimes individuals, and the genes that code for the beneficial phenotypes, can reap great rewards for helping out a fellow with a long memory.

1019. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164826 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Hmmmm,
You must further realize that evolutionary processes are not doing anything for the species or even the individual. They are simply changing gene frequencies from one generation to the next. Of course that will have an effect on the phenotypes produced. So thinking in terms of adaptations that are "for the good of the species" is likely to produce a certain amount of confusion.

1020. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164817 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 6:09 pm

Hmmmmmm
There actually is quite a deal of convergence. But different researchers will be led to set their outgroup (This is the group to which you think a group is closely related but that will give you-if your initial research is good, a sound way to compare the group you are interested in) differently. I did a bit of work as an undergrad trying to work out the phylogenetics of the Corvidae (the crows, jays and the magpies). I compared the traditional corvidae with two different out groups. Hermit Thrush and, what I hoped was a much closer relative, the Carolina chickadee. In both cases my relationships stayed the same, and the novelities, I discovered remained.

The big key is outgroup selection (about which we can quibble as researchers) and the number of base pairs which should be large, those base pairs ought to come from a gene that is highly conserved (that is that doesn't exhibit for reasons of functionality lots of random change). The reason is very simple. If I just compare say 10 base pairs from a gene for eye color whatever results I get aren't goint to be terribly meaningful. Maybe there is a lot of change in this part of the sequence. Am I looking at junk DNA? Who knows you are just looking at 10 bps anyway, on a gene that fluctuates randomly without much selective penalty.

Outgroup selection is important too. If had done my bp comparisson using an aligator as my out group, all the members of the Corvidae would look much tighter than they might be. Or what if I used a squid as my out group? You see how that could throw things off. In my case I based my two out group comparissons on anatomical clues, and literature research. I picked two out groups from the the same order Passeriformes because I wanted to see if my initial assumptions were justified. If I got a different cladogram with the Hermit thrush then perhaps I would be back at the drawing board.

My cladogram though conformed, in large part to cladograms predicted on morphology alone. My novel results came from the genus Persoreus and a long suspected paraphylly in Corvus. (For anyone interested, my analysis suggests that the Gray Jay and the Siberian Jay are not likely as closely related as was once thought, and their similarities stem largely from convergence, though both seem to belong rather firmly in the Corvidae.)

1021. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #164804 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 5:51 pm

I think Diacanu said it best.
I join him in his eyeroll

1022. Interviews with Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer

Comment #164733 by MaxD on April 20, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Shermer's line about needing to get to work and Ben Stein needed to hurry up made my day. "Come on man, I've got stuff to do!"

I've disliked Ben Stein ever since his hissy fit at Margaret Cho during the MTV coverage of the election in 2000 I think it was.

1023. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #162184 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 9:34 am

Hope I am not one of the people of whom you despair.

1024. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162166 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 9:01 am

I wasn't sweating it. I was hoping for my fun youtube clip in June is all.

1025. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #162165 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 8:58 am

Sargeist said:

The opposition to male homosexuality seems to be entirely based on the "ickiness" factor. While I was at university the LGB society set up some stalls the Student Union with some posters saying that a fair proportion of gay men do not indulge in anal sex. I was left thinking that as a way of making people accept people for who they are, this wasn't really very useful: "Look, we're ok really, cos not all of us are doing those icky things. [but if we were, then it'd be fine for you to hate us?]"

I think the ickyness factor is indeed a huge part of the problem. I'm not sure why it is so viceral but it certainly can be. For some reason too it is male homosexuality that is considered icky and not the lesbian variety. Further I am lost as to why the reaction to male=male anal sex is often so visceral considering that the male-female version is so popular.
Its all very confusing.

1026. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162160 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 8:45 am

Reading a bit through the post,
I the discussion of lying, is a nice wed to the discussion of Iranian Vice-cops.
He found himself in a position in which lying was the only way to go!

Or he was really praying. maybe he read about the nakedness with young women from Ghandi.

1027. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162159 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 8:42 am

Al,
I think you missed my question.
Did strength ever return?

1028. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162137 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 8:13 am

Hey Al-rawandi!
Did our angry IDF, from minnessota every return?

1029. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162122 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 7:44 am

Here is one of the grosser (a word?) mischaracterizations by the good and gentle wee-flea.

I found your comments about a 'clear thinking, clear feeling, clear being oasis' interesting. Firstly I do not agree that RD net is clear thinking. In fact in general it is very confused and muddled thinking which seems to be largely driven by emotion and feeling and also a kind of 'in group' mentality. If you do not 'believe' you do not 'belong'. It is in other words an alternative religious philosophy. Jesus had a great thing to say about that - you shall know them by their fruits. I believe that despite all the abuses of religion, despite the hypocrisies of so many of us Christians, the Good News of Jesus Christ provides the clear thinking/feeling/being which you are looking for.

I mean I don't really need to say more than what a complete lie just about every point. Do you see how that might be unfair and dishonest Clearthinker? It maybe a rougher forum in here. People maybe challenged, and challenged vigorously but still no one demands anyone be banned, or told to leave. I do think this site is for serious intellectuals-though it isn't always seriously intellectual-who come understanding they will be challenged, and would disappointed otherwise.

Of course you will quote mine to rebut but we both know that is a dishonest trick of yours too.

1030. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162115 by MaxD on April 16, 2008 at 7:25 am

You can almost see, embedded in everything RM says why he won't last long in the faith community. He can't help the little slams of the religion. Note in this passage, highlighted by the beneficient Quetz, and again by me,

thank you for having shown me the limits of materialism and "rational thinking". I will happily continue to use these for driving to work, preparing a cassoulet and being operated on for my hernia.
But for the essential, for that which gives freedom, I shall henceforth be looking elsewhere.

He just cannot avoid the side door slam of religion. Materialism gets the backhanded compliment but it also implies that religion is really only good for making you feel better. If this isn't the epitome of Freud's critique I don't know what is. Saying things like "I'm not hallucinating...yet," would surely rankle people of true faith. I mean look at hackles on Kardashovel's when I do this.
"Kardashovel, you voices are hallucinations."
:)

Clearly RM needs more unity, and rank feel goodery than he gets here. Sadly I don't think that thing he is looking for will be found at FOCS.

1031. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161658 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 1:32 pm

Steve Zara's post above prompted this literary sillyness from me
The lion did roar, and all who heard, did tremble even unto their smalles toes.

1032. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161652 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Seeker,
The universe as we know it at least didn't exist 50 billion years ago.

1033. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161635 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Mitchell Gilks said:

This is just a reason why religiously based schools need to die a quiet death.

It can be noisy.

1034. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161625 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Frankus,
Now, you drift into the "Not my cotton" argument!

1035. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161611 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Al-rawandi
I don't think you are going to get a lot of takers on that concept of purity!
But comfy cotton undies? A good start!

1036. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161606 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:54 pm

AlexMZK said:

i believe what the Bible says is that gay couples should not sleep together. there is apparently no Biblical condemnation of dancing.

I suspect its not the sleeping part that has people concerned, but rather the horizontal dancing that they cannot, no matter how hard they try, stop thinking about.

1037. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161602 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:49 pm

Dune I am with you on. Amazing book. After I read it I wanted to be a planetary ecologist! However I have yet to pick up Chapterhouse because I am so finicky about the delivery platform of my fiction. ANd sometimes Herbert is just too clunky.

1038. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161598 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:43 pm

We love all our [gay] students as we do all people in our churches but their lifestyle is not encouraged, particularly if it was a promiscuous lifestyle. We are dealing with young people here.

Young people, we should further say, we have no problem marginalizing and alienating. Its a good thing they have God to comfort them because just don't have that kind time!

1039. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161589 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Navyjake,
Well I am interested to hear your concept of purity.

I am curious to know about about why you stopped being an atheist.

1040. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161574 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Diacanu
The notion my inlaws had about purity was very problematic for the early years of the relationship I have with the woman that became, and remains my wife.

Purity is a concept that is used to control. I have to totally agree.

1041. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161564 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:10 pm

If I find gold, I am high on the purity! The more pure the better. If I am drinking alcohol I don't want high purity. I like Guinness.
Beyond that I think you are going to have to go ahead and spring your trap :)

1042. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161555 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:05 pm

SeekerofTruth said:

Anyone here who thinks they know anything for sure is just a used car salesman.

Hmmmm. That seems like someone making a blanket, and absolutely sure statement.
I am looking for a car.....

1043. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161551 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 12:01 pm

Al I do that too, but I look for the fresh stuff in my price range.

1044. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161546 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:56 am

I of course do look for good produce. But I don't think much of the concept of purity as the religious often understand it.

1045. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161543 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:49 am

NavyJake,
Said:

For every person you point out, I can easily point out the flaws (LBJ's "Great Society" vision is also seen by others as a great "Boondoggle" for all the damage done. How about the less than honest presentation of the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident by LBJ that widened the Vietnam War?).

This is part of my point. Dealing in terms like heart kind of misses the point that people are multi-faceted. Flawed is a good word I supppose.
But I didn't say they were un-flawed. I just said they had heart. Then i asked you to define what you thought the word meant. Because I don't want to spin in circles because we are talking about different things.

You ask:

Let me ask you this: Do you believe in Right and Wrong

I answer: Yes.

1046. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161535 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:33 am

Black Wolf, that made my day.

Al-rawandi,
You and I are smelling the same thing I think.
And man it is terribly noisome.

Diacanu seems to know how it is prepared. Hopefully he knows how to prepare an antidote.

1047. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161533 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:28 am

Navyjake,
I fully do support your freedom to say whatever you need to say.

I have to ask what you mean by heart though because often when talking about things like this wheels get spun and spun because people are talking about different things.

In any case if you think that inner character can be adequately adjudicated on the basis of a few explicatives than I must respectfully disagree.
LBJ was one of the most foul mouthed presidents we've ever had, yet he possessed enough integrity to "lose the south for a generation" over civil rights.

Joe Frazier was a fairly foul mouthed boxer, but had more heart than almost anyone of his generation. And more integrity to boot.
Quinton Rampage Jackson, now a UFC fighter was a famously foul mouthed fighter before finding jesus, and more consistently successful in Pride during his foul mouthed days.
Most of my friends are pretty foul mouthed but give to various charitable causes both time and money.
Hitch drops a few f-bombs now and then, but I think he has heart. He is certianly brave.

I could probably do this all day. So what do you mean by heart?

1048. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161527 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:18 am

So you aren't really a member of the IDF? Disappointing.
I've long thought Krav Maga wasn't effective and was hoping to see how my BJJ/MMA stacked up against the famed Israeli Krav Maga.
Ah well....

1049. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161523 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:16 am

Strength do you have anything interesting to say?

1050. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161519 by MaxD on April 15, 2008 at 11:14 am

I think the AFH is certainly an art form. But I don't mind the use of harsh language to underline a point, even a serious one.
Hitchens use of such technique is brilliant,
"At least you can fucking die and get out of North Korea."

But the AFH is dangerous, double edged to be sure.