Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

American atheist feels misunderstood, attacks Uncommon Descent

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

File:A small cup of coffee.JPG

Apparently, “Angry by Choice,” the star of this post “Precious: American atheist finds ENCODE to be bullshot science,” noticed “a spike in traffic” on the post. It was actually more of a mini-spikette at our end, but never mind. Anyway, he posted a response here. We can’t quote most of it, for reasons that will be apparent. However,

I am an atheist, and proud to state that. How that relates to my post on how I perceive science is being sold seems irrelevant. I also have black hair, albeit with some gray, why not title the post: Precious: Graying American finds ENCODE to be bullshot science. I am a parent so maybe: Precious: American dad finds ENCODE to be bullshot science. I’m also a scientist, which seems relevant. It’s more relevant to my post than my views on god, my hair color, or parental status. But you know what, me being a scientist is not relevant to uncommondescent’s post. In fact, I’ld argue it undercuts the strength of their post. Pointing out I think their god is hooey, is essentially poisoning the well so that their readers, conservative christians, will not bother reading my post or thinking. (I was going to write more after ‘or thinking,’ but realized I didn’t need to.)

Spanish proverb: He who loses his temper has lost the argument.

Pos-Darwinista writes to ask,

How can such a person be an university professor?

[Is he? Really? My, my. – O’Leary for News ]

Does he use these foul mouthed words in the classroom? I bet he does. Two years ago I gave a talk about ID in a Brazilian public university for some 1.200 Biology students, and was shocked with the wild foul mouthed talk given by the evolutionist professor, that I opened my talk with these words: Professor So and So, after your joking talk, it will be pretty hard for me to sell my fish, but let’s do business here! I got profound silence from a wild laughing audience that paid close attention to my talk on ID and made a lot of questions in the Q & A section.

Well, that’s today’s Darwinism for ya: Long on profanity, short on viable ideas.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Hat tip: Pos-Darwinista

Note: One of our post authors is a learned gentleman in the Caribbean who simply will not permit his Canadian (British Commonwealth) colleague to use bad language, hence she tries to avoid it.

Comments
Why be angry when he can be happy as a 'disco clam'? Disco Clams Light Up the Ocean Floor - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_siqfXOSaA Source of disco clams' light show discovered - June 24, 2014 Excerpt: It didn't take long for her to confirm that the flashing was not, as most people assumed, a form of bioluminescence – a chemical reaction inside animals like plankton that produces light similar to that of a glow stick. Instead, she found, the edge of the clam's mantle lip is highly reflective on one side. When the clam unfurls its lip – typically twice a second – the millimeter-wide mirror is revealed and reflects the ambient light, like a disco ball.,,, The inside of the clam's lip is packed with tiny spheres of silica, only 340 nanometers in diameter, that are ideal reflectors, particularly of the blue light that penetrates deeper into seawater than does red light. The outside of the lip contains no silica nanospheres, so when the lip is furled, no light is reflected. By repeatedly unfurling and furling the lip, the clam produces a continual rippling light show. The non-reflective back of the lip strongly absorbs blue light, so it appears dark and makes the contrast between the sides even more striking.,,, She could find no other instance of animals using silica nanospheres as flashing reflectors, though the white color of several insects apparently comes from a layer of silica that reflects white light. http://phys.org/news/2014-06-source-disco-clams.htmlbornagain77
June 25, 2014
June
06
Jun
25
25
2014
08:49 AM
8
08
49
AM
PDT
In that blog post Angry by Choice writes:
Is junk DNA a prediction of evolutionary biology? No.
I would beg to differ. His mention of e coli is irrelevant because the predictions were in regard to eukaryote genomes.
I would love to see some publications that support the idea that junk DNA is required
The link above has a landslide of them. T. Ryan Gregory 2014, for example: "if the rate at which these mutations are generated is higher than the rate at which natural selection can weed them out, then the collective genomes of the organisms in the species will suffer a meltdown as the total number of deleterious alleles increases with each generation... [This is] incompatible with the view that 80% of the genome is functional in the sense implied by ENCODE." Granted, later in the article he says "I'll admit there may very well be papers out there suggesting that junk DNA is required for evolutionary theory to be tenable"JoeCoder
June 25, 2014
June
06
Jun
25
25
2014
08:04 AM
8
08
04
AM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply