Comments on: Trying Not to be Stupid http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/ An independent blog about intelligent design Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:12:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: MikeGene http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4298 MikeGene Sat, 29 Oct 2005 03:42:36 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4298 Krauze: <blockquote>ID critic Tara Smith of Aetiology is also scratching her head over Neill's claim that "many of the proteins are present elsewhere in the body", and suggests that Neill confused the bacterial flagellum with the eukaryotic flagellum. Looks like someone also has to inform the executive editor of JCI that bacterial flagella are fundamentally different from eukaryotic flagella.</blockquote> Charitable interpretations come free if you play for the right team. More scientific objectivity on display. LOL. Krauze:
ID critic Tara Smith of Aetiology is also scratching her head over Neill's claim that "many of the proteins are present elsewhere in the body", and suggests that Neill confused the bacterial flagellum with the eukaryotic flagellum. Looks like someone also has to inform the executive editor of JCI that bacterial flagella are fundamentally different from eukaryotic flagella.

Charitable interpretations come free if you play for the right team. More scientific objectivity on display. LOL.

]]> By: Fer http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4293 Fer Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:11:14 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4293 Now I think that Ushma S. Neill needs to eat the soup of his own plate! Now I think that Ushma S. Neill needs to eat the soup of his own plate!

]]> By: TomG http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4281 TomG Fri, 28 Oct 2005 13:47:50 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4281 I just want to leave a word of appreciation for the sense of humor you consistently bring to this issue, without being mean-spirited about it. (You can probably think of one or two evolution-oriented websites where "mean-spirited" is not lacking.) Yesterday's <a href="http://telicthoughts.com/?p=330" rel="nofollow">post</a> was another good example. Yes, students, good thinking can be fun! I just want to leave a word of appreciation for the sense of humor you consistently bring to this issue, without being mean-spirited about it. (You can probably think of one or two evolution-oriented websites where "mean-spirited" is not lacking.) Yesterday's post was another good example. Yes, students, good thinking can be fun!

]]> By: AdR http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4278 AdR Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:17:36 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4278 "It is time for educated, motivated scientists to get involved and to educate others." I think it's time for educated, motivated scientists to recognize that neodarwinism is not able to produce useful theories about evolution. It is also interesting to see how scientists that do not have a clue about evolution (BTW, 99% of scientists have never thought about the molecular details about evolution), still find that they should defend their failed theories. "It is time for educated, motivated scientists to get involved and to educate others."

I think it's time for educated, motivated scientists to recognize that neodarwinism is not able to produce useful theories about evolution.

It is also interesting to see how scientists that do not have a clue about evolution (BTW, 99% of scientists have never thought about the molecular details about evolution), still find that they should defend their failed theories.

]]> By: Krauze http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4274 Krauze Fri, 28 Oct 2005 11:50:47 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4274 ID critic Tara Smith of <a href="http://aetiology.blogspot.com/2005/10/more-academic-journals-discussing-id.html" rel="nofollow">Aetiology</a> is also scratching her head over Neill's claim that "many of the proteins are present elsewhere in the body", and suggests that Neill confused the bacterial flagellum with the <em>eukaryotic</em> flagellum. Looks like someone also has to inform the executive editor of JCI that bacterial flagella are fundamentally different from eukaryotic flagella. ID critic Tara Smith of Aetiology is also scratching her head over Neill's claim that "many of the proteins are present elsewhere in the body", and suggests that Neill confused the bacterial flagellum with the eukaryotic flagellum. Looks like someone also has to inform the executive editor of JCI that bacterial flagella are fundamentally different from eukaryotic flagella.

]]> By: willo http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4264 willo Fri, 28 Oct 2005 03:34:23 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4264 Great article thanks Mike, keep this sort of exposure up and methinks Neill and his cronies are going to have to change their tactic sooner or later. btw I thought point 3 was one of the arguments used by idist in their general critique of NDE. Great article thanks Mike, keep this sort of exposure up and methinks Neill and his cronies are going to have to change their tactic sooner or later.

btw I thought point 3 was one of the arguments used by idist in their general critique of NDE.

]]> By: Joe G http://telicthoughts.com/trying-not-to-be-stupid/#comment-4263 Joe G Fri, 28 Oct 2005 02:47:25 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=334#comment-4263 It is that this sort of article is being published that ID needs to be taught. IC appears to be the least understood, yet nicely defined, concept going. It isn't that <i>evolution</i> can't account for IC systems. It <b>is</b> that there isn't anything to select for until the system is configured and in place. IOW IC violates the concept of <i>natural selection</i>. We all know what artificial selection can do- let's see NS <i>create</i> a toy poodle. As for ID being taught- Neill undoubtedly wants it as wiped clean as Iran wants to do to Israel. Being "taught" to this ilk means allowing people to understand what ID <b>really</b> is and that religion has nothing to do with it. I wonder if they will print my response? It is that this sort of article is being published that ID needs to be taught.

IC appears to be the least understood, yet nicely defined, concept going. It isn't that evolution can't account for IC systems. It is that there isn't anything to select for until the system is configured and in place. IOW IC violates the concept of natural selection. We all know what artificial selection can do- let's see NS create a toy poodle.

As for ID being taught- Neill undoubtedly wants it as wiped clean as Iran wants to do to Israel. Being "taught" to this ilk means allowing people to understand what ID really is and that religion has nothing to do with it.

I wonder if they will print my response?

]]>