Friday, June 08, 2007
Still Banned From Uncommon Descent
Poor old DaveScott. Like GilDodgen he's very confused about the evolution of topoisomerases [A Dynamic Fitness Landscape]. He posted the same video they've been confused about for several months and asked if someone could explain it to him. I tried to post a comment to help him out since he really needs it. I linked to my earlier posting [A State of Extreme Cognitive Dissonance].
My comment never got published on the blog. I guess like most IDiots he doesn't want my help.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
13 comments :
Davescot is resitent not only to evidence but also to helpful hints.
A simple PubMed search for "Topoisomerase and evolution" brings up the following article in the first place:
Forterre P, Gribaldo S, Gadelle D, Serre MC.
Origin and evolution of DNA topoisomerases.
Biochimie. 2007 Apr;89(4):427-46. Epub 2007 Jan 4.
If one looks in the Reviews section the secons article is:
Gadelle D, Filee J, Buhler C, Forterre P.
Phylogenomics of type II DNA topoisomerases.
Bioessays. 2003 Mar;25(3):232-42.
Thus, why should anybody explain something for which sufficient material is obviously available? Just because Davescot is too lazy to do some literature search? In addition, since he doesn’t have the skills to understand biological literature it would be just wasted time.
Curiosity got the best of me and made me compelled to check out this Uncommon Descent.
Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. etc...
I do not want to be disrespectful to other's options..., but seriously, where do they get all this stuff from?
but seriously, where do they get all this stuff from?It comes directly from their heads. Still, I am not sure if a single neuron is involved in the process of generating such bullshit.
It ultimately comes from cheesy poofs. DaveScot love cheesy poofs, and when he's hovering over his keyboard in the basement, the cheesy poofs fuel his "brain".
DaveScot is resistant to facts about more than just evolution. He's also into encouraging hucksters selling unproven cancer therapies as well.
I do not want to be disrespectful to other's options...,
See, there's your problem right there. Respect the person, yes, but there is no a priori reason to respect an opinion, regardless of the person who holds it.
Who exactly is DaveScot anyway? From what I have read, that is not even his real name. Furthermore, I'm not sure that he actually has any scientific qualifications (sounds like his background is in computer science).
What does it say about Dembski that his primary 'science' spokesperson doesn't use his real name or is not an actual scientist?
I tried to post a comment to help him out
By not give attention to his strawman of a dynamic fitness landscape (which would be very complicated and probably impossible to replicate considering all the contingency in evolution) you nailed it IMVHO.
What does it say about Dembski that his primary 'science' spokesperson doesn't use his real name or is not an actual scientist?
Actually, I believe DaveScot was ousted for a while, because he has such an atrocious attitude against others commenting.
But it seems the renewal of banning of outside commenters let him back to be the main naive anti-science spokesperson. (IMHO Dembski, Behe, Wells, and others, are worse but they have their specific agendas of perversion. DaveScot seems to be all over the place.)
Who exactly is DaveScot anyway?
His real name is apparently David Scott Springer and he's a retired programmer with some worthless patents that don't even cite any non-patent prior art. Oh, and he's a "waterfront property owner" (in Texas, I seem to recall) and father of adult kids who evidently consider DaveScot to be a complete douchebag because they've never bothered once to defend their dad's religion-peddling idiocy.
That DaveTard would look to topoisomerases as proof of "design" is yet another example of how moronic these braindead mental fart-spewing idiots really are.
Topoisomerases are necessary for life only because the structure of DNA chromosomes mandates such enzymes. But the communication of information from one organism to another doesn't mandate double-stranded DNA. That's just what we ended up with. There's nothing "intelligent" about the structure of DNA, just as there's nothing intelligent about the rings around Saturn or water swirling down your drain.
sdqwdqfd
DaveScot is not an IDist, he calls himself an Agnostic, and he bans anyone who is perceived to threaten his "intellectuality." I am an IDist and I am banned for absolutely nothing other than threatening his perceived "intellectuality." There is no insult in being banned by Scot since he only bans persons who threaten his "intellectuality." The real concern, for IDists, is why a scholar like Dembski would allow himself to be fronted by an Agnostic? Intelligent persons know the same is an ashamed Atheist who is also attempting to stake out a perceived position of objectivity that does not exist. For a man of the Cross, a soldier of Christ, Dembski has shamed his Savior by allowing an Atheist to front for him.
Big deal.
I'm banned from Kansas Citizens for Science...which I found out is not primarily made up of Kansas Citizens and is not really about Science...the Anti Evolution site, the Pandas Thumb, PZ Myers site and ALL Wired Science blogs, etc.
Atheists specialize in banning people...you are lucky if thats all they do.
Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. etc...
What beats me is why he keeps such glaring idiocy at the top of his blog - but then again, it figures, doesn't it?
Post a Comment