Neo-Darwinism is Dead.

[Kalkidas]

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 09:30:55 -0700, the following appeared

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

That's nice.

I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.

And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee! Tee-hee! You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!

Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

The biggest problem with evolution, and I've already
committed you to the mental institution in your head so
don't try to react but, the biggest problem is that it's
upside down. What we call "Evolution" is a result and not
any kind of process.

We look at the DNA in a population of flies. Ten years
later we look at that population's DNA again and find
that what typified it has changed. We call that evolution.
We call that CHANGE evolution. We call that RESULT of
pressures, international and external, evolution...

Google: Mutagens

Now try to Google: Sexual Selection

One is a choice -- "THIS female gives me a boner, as opposed
to THAT female" -- the other a population is most likely to
be completely oblivious to. But, both can change the DNA
within a population.

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

You should read this fine book:

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536

Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.

Here's a review:

https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm

You're welcome.

The biggest problem with evolution, and I've already
committed you to the mental institution in your head so
don't try to react but, the biggest problem is that it's
upside down. What we call "Evolution" is a result and not
any kind of process.
We look at the DNA in a population of flies. Ten years
later we look at that population's DNA again and find
that what typified it has changed. We call that evolution.
We call that CHANGE evolution. We call that RESULT of
pressures, international and external, evolution...
Google:  Mutagens
Now try to Google:  Sexual Selection
One is a choice -- "THIS female gives me a boner, as opposed
to THAT female" -- the other a population is most likely to
be completely oblivious to. But, both can change the DNA
within a population.

[JTEM]

You should probably not hit 'Reply' if you have nothing to
say and instead are just going to enter a psychotic state
and believe you are a teacher handing out reading assignments.

So again I tell you to Google: Mutagens.

Mutagens would be a "Cause" a reason while you place the title
"Evolution" on the results -- what those mutagens did.

And that's wrong. It's upside down.

Wrong thinking brings you wrong answers.

[Bob Casanova]

On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

<snip random babbling>

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
And you expect this...

Lol! You're such a pussy!

Seriously, the way you have to react to another sock puppet so
you can pretend you didn't read my post... pussy!

What offended your "totally reasonable" sensibilities this time?

Hmm?

What did you "Disagree" with? As if you know. Pussy.

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

[JTEM]

Post by John Harshman
I expect nothing

And you contribute as much. So, again: What did you disagree
with and why?

Are you capable of answering or are you admitted that you're
just an emotional disturbed troll cowering behind a drawer
full of sock puppets?

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)

So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)
So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.
The first half is just history of science from a personal hatred of
Darwin, but the second half is an attempt to come up with a theory of
evolutionary process that's more predictive than natural selection. It's
crazy, but in a way that could inspire thought.

[JTEM]

Post by John Harshman
It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.

This is a discussion group, not a book club. Nobody is arguing with a
book here, nor can they.

If you find something in a book which you agree with, and want to
advance and it here, go house. Otherwise, insert used Qtips in your
anus.

Thanks ever so much in advance.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:17:57 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)
So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.
The first half is just history of science from a personal hatred of
Darwin, but the second half is an attempt to come up with a theory of
evolutionary process that's more predictive than natural selection. It's
crazy, but in a way that could inspire thought.

Thanks for the info. I took a look, but $55, while not out
of line for a niche-market book, even used, is more than I'm
willing to spend. I did read the review by Gert Korthof, and
from his comments it appears that the book is basically an
argument against natural selection as the be-all of
evolutionary theory, which is (I believe) an idea which
isn't that far from the mainstream, since unless I'm
mistaken the ToE, like all scientific theories, is a work in
progress, and what was true yesterday will almost certainly
be different tomorrow. Of course, that's it's strength, that
"settles science" is at best disingenuous, and at worst
dogma

Anyway, thanks again for the info.

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:17:57 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)
So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.
The first half is just history of science from a personal hatred of
Darwin, but the second half is an attempt to come up with a theory of
evolutionary process that's more predictive than natural selection. It's
crazy, but in a way that could inspire thought.

Thanks for the info. I took a look, but $55, while not out
of line for a niche-market book, even used, is more than I'm
willing to spend.

This is why we have libraries. Dunno if you have a major university near
you, but if so it's fairly likely they might have a copy.

Post by Bob Casanova
I did read the review by Gert Korthof, and
from his comments it appears that the book is basically an
argument against natural selection as the be-all of
evolutionary theory, which is (I believe) an idea which
isn't that far from the mainstream, since unless I'm
mistaken the ToE, like all scientific theories, is a work in
progress, and what was true yesterday will almost certainly
be different tomorrow. Of course, that's it's strength, that
"settles science" is at best disingenuous, and at worst
dogma

Løvtrup goes a bit farther than arguing against natural selection. He
tries to generate some laws of macroevolution, and that's an interesting
if failed attempt.

Post by Bob Casanova
Anyway, thanks again for the info.

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:15:11 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:17:57 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)
So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.
The first half is just history of science from a personal hatred of
Darwin, but the second half is an attempt to come up with a theory of
evolutionary process that's more predictive than natural selection. It's
crazy, but in a way that could inspire thought.

Thanks for the info. I took a look, but $55, while not out
of line for a niche-market book, even used, is more than I'm
willing to spend.

This is why we have libraries. Dunno if you have a major university near
you, but if so it's fairly likely they might have a copy.

ASU has campuses in various places, the nearest (~25 miles)
in Tempe, but it's not very convenient and I'm pretty sure
it's only for current students and faculty.

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I did read the review by Gert Korthof, and
from his comments it appears that the book is basically an
argument against natural selection as the be-all of
evolutionary theory, which is (I believe) an idea which
isn't that far from the mainstream, since unless I'm
mistaken the ToE, like all scientific theories, is a work in
progress, and what was true yesterday will almost certainly
be different tomorrow. Of course, that's it's strength, that
"settles science" is at best disingenuous, and at worst
dogma

Løvtrup goes a bit farther than arguing against natural selection. He
tries to generate some laws of macroevolution, and that's an interesting
if failed attempt.

OK.

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
Anyway, thanks again for the info.

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:15:11 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:17:57 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:41:13 -0700, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:44:45 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

And you expect this...person(?)...to actually read...why?

I expect nothing, but it's an interesting book that he would like,
because it's quite wacko in just the way he is.

Point taken. ;-)
So it should probably be added to Chariots of the Gods, the
Calmagorod Papers and anything written about aquatic apes or
pyramidology on the "Light Reading for Whackos" list.

It's actually worth a read if you're interested in evolutionary theory.
The first half is just history of science from a personal hatred of
Darwin, but the second half is an attempt to come up with a theory of
evolutionary process that's more predictive than natural selection. It's
crazy, but in a way that could inspire thought.

Thanks for the info. I took a look, but $55, while not out
of line for a niche-market book, even used, is more than I'm
willing to spend.

This is why we have libraries. Dunno if you have a major university near
you, but if so it's fairly likely they might have a copy.

ASU has campuses in various places, the nearest (~25 miles)
in Tempe, but it's not very convenient and I'm pretty sure
it's only for current students and faculty.

Again, dunno, but I can get books from several university libraries by
interlibrary loan to my public library.

Post by Bob Casanova

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
I did read the review by Gert Korthof, and
from his comments it appears that the book is basically an
argument against natural selection as the be-all of
evolutionary theory, which is (I believe) an idea which
isn't that far from the mainstream, since unless I'm
mistaken the ToE, like all scientific theories, is a work in
progress, and what was true yesterday will almost certainly
be different tomorrow. Of course, that's it's strength, that
"settles science" is at best disingenuous, and at worst
dogma

Løvtrup goes a bit farther than arguing against natural selection. He
tries to generate some laws of macroevolution, and that's an interesting
if failed attempt.

OK.

Post by John Harshman

Post by Bob Casanova
Anyway, thanks again for the info.

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
Point taken. ;-)

Lol!

As if...

[RonO]

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

My guess is that the "Neo-Darwinism" that is supposed to have died never
really existed. You must recall that "Darwinism" is just anything about
science that Biblical creationists do not like at the time that
creationists use the term. Just like you are glad that there never was
any ID science worth supporting. If there had been any viable ID
science it would have just been more science for you to deny.

Ron Okimoto

[burkhard]

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

..and Darwin was right after all?? You sure that's
the hill you want to reincarnate on?

[RonO]

Post by burkhard

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

..and Darwin was right after all?? You sure that's
the hill you want to reincarnate on?

Kalk admitted that he wasn't Hindu when he quit supporting the ID scam
years ago. He is just the usual Biblical creationist that wanted to
support the ID creationist scam for religious reasons.

Ron Okimoto

[erik simpson]

Post by RonO

Post by burkhard

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

..and Darwin was right after all?? You sure that's
the hill you want to reincarnate on?

Kalk admitted that he wasn't Hindu when he quit supporting the ID scam
years ago.  He is just the usual Biblical creationist that wanted to
support the ID creationist scam for religious reasons.
Ron Okimoto

Well, don't we need a creationist or two, just to keep the ball rolling?

[FromTheRafters]

Post by erik simpson

Post by RonO

Post by burkhard

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

..and Darwin was right after all?? You sure that's
the hill you want to reincarnate on?

Kalk admitted that he wasn't Hindu when he quit supporting the ID scam
years ago.  He is just the usual Biblical creationist that wanted to
support the ID creationist scam for religious reasons.
Ron Okimoto

Well, don't we need a creationist or two, just to keep the ball rolling?

Should we create one, or just wait for one to evolve naturally?

[RonO]

Post by erik simpson

Post by RonO

Post by burkhard

Post by Kalkidas
http://youtu.be/K-U-ZB3yHK4

..and Darwin was right after all?? You sure that's
the hill you want to reincarnate on?

Kalk admitted that he wasn't Hindu when he quit supporting the ID scam
years ago.  He is just the usual Biblical creationist that wanted to
support the ID creationist scam for religious reasons.
Ron Okimoto

Well, don't we need a creationist or two, just to keep the ball rolling?

Yes, but reincarnation never mattered to Kalk. Kalk always had another
notion of being born again.

ID is pretty much dead in terms of creationist support on TO. I just
keep updating what the ID perps are claiming because they are still
influencing creationists like the West Virginia creationist rubes that
just past their teach ID scam legislation without an apparent clue that
the bait and switch has been going down for over 22 years, and the ID
perps have nothing that they want to teach. No creationist rubes have
ever gotten any ID science to teach in the public schools from the ID
perps at the Discovery Institute. All that they have ever gotten is the
obfuscation and denial switch scam that the ID perps tell them has
nothing to do with ID. The West Virginia creationist rubes are just the
latest example. The ID perps were asleep at the switch again, and
allowed the legislation to get passed and signed. They used to have an
ID perp who's job it was to track the rubes and make sure that the bait
and switch went down, but it looks like they never refilled that
position after the last one quit after running the bait and switch on
the Utah creationist rubes back in 2017. Before Utah they hadn't had to
run the bait and switch on any creationist rubes after they ran the scam
on both Louisiana and Texas in 2013. My guess is that they felt that it
wasn't worth the expense to pay someone to prevent any legislators or
school boards from trying to teach ID. In West Virginia they had to try
a retroactive switch scam and flat out told the rubes that the Discovery
Institute did not support teaching ID in the public schools, and that
they should consider the obfuscation and denial switch scam.

Ron Okimoto