Why we have a News desk

_{Denyse O'Leary

January 3, 2015

Intelligent Design, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Bornagain77 kindly writes, in response to: November 2014: Events that made a difference to ID,

Thanks for all your hard work. You probably don’t know it as much as you should because of all the insults from Darwinists, but you are very much appreciated!

Actually, I find Darwin’s followers, and naturalists generally, amusing—and normally judge them by whether they could possibly contribute to our site numbers in some legitimate way.

(True, some people might visit our site only to read The Best of Joe Troll and Joe Moron. But we think Joe + Joe’s fans would be happier at another site… and we would not want serious commenters of any sort to be discouraged by those guys’ slow-class antics. So I am happy with serious commenters whatever their orientation—but am a mod and can borf the Joes.)

I started writing news for Uncommon Descent a while back because it seemed that no one was telling the ID community’s story from the perspective of the ID community as such.

Having been a newsie all my life, I saw that as a significant gap.

Various publications, friendly or hostile, were fronting news about us. But there was no generic news stream for us. So I started one.

As always, some like it, some hate it, and most either read it or not. Anyway, if you heard news of interest here first, that’s my job.

See also: Who just wouldn’t be accepted in the ID community?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

Golly, now it's a truism! And do you understand that if a photon hitting a detector is going to translate information about the Big Bang, it will be physicochemically arbitrary to that effect?Upright BiPed_{January 6, 2015
January
01
Jan
6
06
2015
03:54 AM
3
03
54
AM
PDT}

Axel Sorry, I misspelled your name @66. Mea culpa. I'm sure you had forgiven me that fault, and know why you did it. :)Dionisio_{January 6, 2015
January
01
Jan
6
06
2015
03:48 AM
3
03
48
AM
PDT}

UB (attn AS):
to translate any form of recorded information into a physical effect requires two arrangements of matter; one to evoke an effect within a system and another to establish what the effect will be
That is, communication systems of any consequence exhibit FSCO/I and point strongly to intentionality, and purposive, intelligently directed configuration, aka contrivance aka design. But of course if one is committed to a worldview that refuses to acknowledge design as a serious possibility for the origin of life forms that use information storage, codes and NC machines to assemble the workhorse protein molecules -- predictably -- the point will be "missed." KFkairosfocus_{January 6, 2015
January
01
Jan
6
06
2015
03:16 AM
3
03
16
AM
PDT}

Ph, the thread author/owner has moderation powers. In addition the Blog owner and certain specific delegates; some of whom have been behind the scenes. (I have not seen Patrick surfacing for quite some time.) I have stood for the principle that we should be civil and should engage substance rather than seek to poison the atmosphere, which has obviously excited opposition from those whose first resort in argument is exactly that. And BTW, that includes in the very thread in question. And, the very fact that I commented at 1:29 (my summing up on tone) and 1:44 am (a brief note on time), then MF did at 3:17 am should suffice to show that I did not close the thread to award myself the last word. I suggest instead that the matter of tone should be seriously addressed. KFkairosfocus_{January 6, 2015
January
01
Jan
6
06
2015
03:08 AM
3
03
08
AM
PDT}

#65 Upright BiPed
...to translate any form of recorded information into a physical effect requires two arrangements of matter; one to evoke an effect within a system and another to establish what the effect will be.
Interesting description. Thanks. :)Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
08:26 PM
8
08
26
PM
PDT}

Axle @ 62 & 63 Thank you so much for explaining those English terms which I didn't know. Now I understand exactly what you meant @53 :). I think I see your point. However, I hope the interlocutor will realize how serious the given subject is. Also hope that some lost sheep reading that post will recognize the voice of the Shepherd and run to Him. I enjoyed reading your comments, which I appreciate. Rev 22:21Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
08:09 PM
8
08
09
PM
PDT}

Aurelio Smith, I get the impression you'd like to move past the pesky details and go straight to denying the conclusion. I say this only because you've managed to make yet another post without addressing a single point made to you. First you start with duality, then immateriality, then chickens and eggs, and now you want to know why I didn't just tell you what I said in a conversation 3 or 4 years ago (which frankly makes no sense to me at all). It appears you'd prefer talk about anything rather than get into the physical details. Do I have that right? Do you understand that to translate any form of recorded information into a physical effect requires two arrangements of matter; one to evoke an effect within a system and another to establish what the effect will be? If you are not offended by that question, I'd like an answer.Upright BiPed_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
07:35 PM
7
07
35
PM
PDT}

Kairofocus, What does that mean you don't own the thread? Are you being obtuse with wording again? Did you close the thread or not? If not who did? Why were you allowed to post your lengthy rebuttal as if its the final conclusion BEFORE it was closed. Who closed the thread without explanation, kairofocus? You have been accused of other kinds of strange moderation efforts here, by those who disagree with you, is this more of that?phoodoo_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
04:47 PM
4
04
47
PM
PDT}

'recently one of the interlocutors got very upset and called me a liar, just because he could not accept my claims that my mind does not process information as fast as most average people out there do (specially women!). It looks as though sincerity is not easily welcome in this world these days. :( Dionisio, atheists are like the driver of the car in front of us, according to my brother-in-law's assessment. He said, see the guy driving that car in front of us? It's not that he doesn't know where he's going... he doesn't who he is.... Funny thing is, as Christians, we know that that is literally true !Axel_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
04:31 PM
4
04
31
PM
PDT}

Your English is excellent, Dionisio, but there's always plenty to learn whatever we're 'into', isn't there? Especially with English, which has such a rich vocabulary - apart from being very difficult and full of anomalies. I don't make allowances for your English, because I'm sure you'd refer to learn. To 'wind' someone 'up', Dionisio means to 'tease' them. Like tightening a spring in a watch! A wonderfully comical metaphor, don't you think? I think an even better word than tease may be 'to bait' someone. But there's nothing quite like a 'wind-up', such as BA77 does regularly to atheists, by ending his posts with songs, hymns, biblical quotes, etc, apparently in a mood of great elation. He is supposed to be cowed by their puerile taunts about creationism, fundamentalism, etc.Axel_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
04:14 PM
4
04
14
PM
PDT}

Upright BiPed. I could not help but notice how Aurelio went right to the heart of your argument. How can you possibly refute that? What on earth will you do now?Mung_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
02:22 PM
2
02
22
PM
PDT}

#55 Axle I have really enjoyed reading your latest comments. I could not have been able to express it as well as you did. Not even close. Thank you. I do appreciate it very much! Many blessings to you. :)Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
10:48 AM
10
10
48
AM
PDT}

#54 kairosfocus Well stated! Thank you.Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
10:40 AM
10
10
40
AM
PDT}

#53 Axle
he’ll think you’re winding him up!
Axle, please, help me to understand what you wrote. My knowledge of English language is still poor, but I want to keep learning it. Just looked for the term 'winding up' and found this: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/winding-up However, I assume what you meant is more context-based? Thank you. :) PS. Feel free to laugh at my poor vocabulary if you want to. That's fine. I won't take it as an offense. It certainly is kind of funny. BTW, recently one of the interlocutors got very upset and called me a liar, just because he could not accept my claims that my mind does not process information as fast as most average people out there do (specially women!). It looks as though sincerity is not easily welcome in this world these days. :(Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
10:32 AM
10
10
32
AM
PDT}

rvb8 'As an atheist I abhor dishonesty on the moral foundation that it impedes human understanding. Apparently as a religious person you have no such restraints.' Evidently, a view of morality shared by the late Dr Mengele. Have you never heard of the Fall? Tut! Tut! Nothing holy about knowledge, ipso facto. Anyway, what would an atheist Dumbo understand about morality? But the wonderfully pompous, nay, grandiose, terms in which you couch your ignorance, makes the humour that bit more special for the amused onlooker.Axel_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
09:53 AM
9
09
53
AM
PDT}

Ph, I just popped by. Saw your comment. I don't own the thread, but I do think the thread had gone into serious trouble long since on tone. Which is what I said. KF PS: Actually, again.kairosfocus_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PDT}

'Remember, as a human being, you’re most probably better than I am. God loves you. Seriously you may want to consider His graceful invitation to reconcile with Him forever. He’s the only source of true joy. Perhaps some anonymous readers of this thread will pray for you too.' Ha! Ha! If I know atheists, Dionisio, he'll think you're winding him up!Axel_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
09:29 AM
9
09
29
AM
PDT}

Well, Mark, unless it's just the title that causes you distress, I would suggest that many of us would prefer to scan and if of interest, ponder, just about any intellectual pabulum, pending Seriously Heavy material directly concerning uncommon descent; or, if really 'pushing the boat out', ID.Axel_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
09:28 AM
9
09
28
AM
PDT}

Did Kairofocus decide he was going to have the last word on the Zero is Even thread and the discussions about Cantor, by giving his lengthy declaration about what he believes is true, and then promptly close the thread to any other opinions-with no explanation as to why? If so, that is really truly bad form, and smacks of some of the complaints others with opposing views have made about this site. Very bad Kairofocus,phoodoo_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
08:29 AM
8
08
29
AM
PDT}

Interesting OP. I have often wondered why some OPs were published as News. The only differences I can detect are: * You can’t be sure who wrote them * They are frequently sarcastic and/or mocking of people or institutions It is of course highly debateable as to what counts as news. Some criteria I might have expected include: * Oriented to fact as opposed to opinion (I appreciate nothing is totally devoid of opinion) * Original information about events rather than comments on other reports * Up-to-date My overwhelming impression is that none of these are true of News on UD. As a check I looked at the 7 News OPs written since this OP. Below is the list and the prime subject matter. They were all highly opinionated. They were all about things other people had written (two of them responses to book reviews so in a sense they were about things other people had written about what other people had written). Four of them were about things written in the last two weeks. One referred to material written in November, one to February, and one to 2013. No God, no science? 2013 book The physicists who worked under Hitler 26 Dec 14 book review Why atheist megachurches are a great thing, and should be encouraged 10 Nov 14 Article Religion can certainly be without God but it can’t be without consequences 25 Dec 14 article NPR tries its hand at the science of consciousness 30 Dec 14 blog post This is exceptionally silly even for current cosmology 4 Feb 14 book review Longtime commenter Bob O’H preens himself at the expense of the Biologic Institute response to comment on UD made 1/1/15 Denyse and others are of course welcome to write anything their readers find interesting but is "News" really a good description?Mark Frank_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
07:48 AM
7
07
48
AM
PDT}

#29 rvb8
“Well, now that you’ve finally responded to my question…”. Seversky responded in his first reply, to your first question, in the aforementioned post, dullard.
Why did you misquote my comments by omitting the last part of my sentence taken from post #28? The part you omitted is very important to the whole meaning of the given sentence, but you left it out: "...in easier for me to understand terms," Was that an intentional omission, in order to support your personal attacks and false accusations? I pray that your unjustified anger gets replaced with true joy. Remember, as a human being, you're most probably better than I am. God loves you. Seriously you may want to consider His graceful invitation to reconcile with Him forever. He's the only source of true joy. Perhaps some anonymous readers of this thread will pray for you too.Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
03:29 AM
3
03
29
AM
PDT}

Querius Thank you for your very encouraging words. I really appreciate them. Many blessings to you.Dionisio_{January 5, 2015
January
01
Jan
5
05
2015
02:53 AM
2
02
53
AM
PDT}

Dionisio, Thanks for posting your thoughts despite the vacuous flack that you have to endure. Like you, I'm busy up to my eyeballs with my projects, and I have similar reservations as you do for the same reasons. I really don't have the time to respond to the vituperation here, especially since much of it either makes no sense, is trivial, or consists primarily of fact--free personal attacks. Thanks again for your posts, which I appreciate. All the best on your projects, -QQuerius_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
11:45 PM
11
11
45
PM
PDT}

I doubt strongly that any 'god botherer' could in any way get me angry, excited, or in any feasible situation, 'het up'. You are a case in point. I pointed out that Seversky had answered your simpleton question about teaching evolutionary bioilogy in public schools, and you lied by saying he had yet to answer it. As an atheist I abhor dishonesty on the moral foundation that it impedes human understanding. Apparently as a religious person you have no such restraints.rvb8_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
08:37 PM
8
08
37
PM
PDT}

News, Is the last word in the first paragraph in post #29 acceptable for labeling another commenter in your OP threads and in this whole site?Dionisio_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
07:30 PM
7
07
30
PM
PDT}

#29 rvb8 Why did you get so upset and angry? Was it necessary? Did you gain anything by doing that, other than venting your visible frustration? :)Dionisio_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
07:23 PM
7
07
23
PM
PDT}

#36 Mung
I’m not here to baby-sit you.
Why did you write that? Did anyone ask you to babysit? :)Dionisio_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
03:08 PM
3
03
08
PM
PDT}

Aurelio Smith,
At best it is redundant.
Again, it is neither offensive nor redundant to ask if you understand what I am saying.
I’m glad you have attempted to define a few terms
Actually, I did more than just attempt a definition. I defined the term with every word in the definition selected for the specific purpose of isolating the concept in material space.
I’m out for the rest of today
No problem. Take all the time you need.Upright BiPed_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
01:08 PM
1
01
08
PM
PDT}

Aurelio Smith,
Lightly sprinkling your comments with such asides may result in Aurelio also losing interest.
No offense is intended by asking you if you grasp what Upright BiPed is saying.
Communication between bacteria? Not sure what you are alluding to?
Bacteria communicate with one another through the exchange of informational media, no differently than any other organism. They use an arrangement of matter to serve as a representation of form, and they have the means to receive those arrangements and translate them into the physical effects specified within their systems. The word "representation" here is materially defined as: an arrangement of matter that evokes an effect within a system, where the arrangement of the medium and the effect it evokes are physicochemically arbitrary. This merely acknowledges the (universally) observed fact that within all semiotic systems, there is a physical (natural, and necessary) discontinuity that exists between the arrangement of the medium and its post-translation effect. This is to say that you cannot, for instance, take the alarm pheromone from an ant, and using physical law, derive "attack the intruder" from it. In other words, in all semiotic systems, the effect that a material medium evokes within a system is not established by the physical arrangement of the medium, but is instead established by a separate arrangement within the system of receiving and identifying that medium. In the case of the ant's pheromone, the effect is not established by the arrangement of the pheromone itself, but is instead established by the arrangement of the receptors and their downstream integration into the ant's sensory system. Another way to understand it is to say that the arrangement of the medium only evokes the effect, but does not physically determine what that effect will be. This systems architecture is ubiquitous in all semiotic systems, where information is translated into physical effects – including within the genome (during protein synthesis, for example). Do you understand these concepts?Upright BiPed_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
09:31 AM
9
09
31
AM
PDT}

Aurelio Smith:
Communication between bacteria? Not sure what you are alluding to?
okay. How about communication within bacteria? Wetware: A Computer in Every Living CellMung_{January 4, 2015
January
01
Jan
4
04
2015
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3 4 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply