By their fruits, Mar 2010
Ron O
regulars have dropped out or been expelled for pretty stupid
behavior. They didn't do anything really bad, just stupid. Not much
changed except the volume of posting. When there was never much in
the way of viable argument on the anti-evolution side there was no
noticable improvement in the posting quality. So adman, Uriel et al
is gone, Spinny-HighQ seems to have started his own group and I don't
know what Tapestry, Picasso et al is doing. Glenn hasn't posted for
sometime. I hope that he is allright. He has been a regular for a
long time even if his posts degerated to snipping from the sidelines.
I put up this list because the people defending the anti-evolution
fiasco are about the best way to get anyone with a brain to realize
just how empty and bogus the supporters are. You can look up more of
their posts using Google, and more anti-evolution posters can be had
by checking out previous "By their fruits" threads.
I usualy have the caveat that these posters are longterm posters and
are a select group. But there seems to be about as many recent
posters as regulars. It takes a special kind of person to keep
beating their heads against the wall when the major scam artists that
are feeding them this junk have pretty much given up on the claptrap
and only sell it to the rubes. What happened to Intelligent Design?
Why is the new scam just an obfuscation scam that doesn't even mention
that intelligent design nor creationism have ever existed? The same
creationist scam artists are selling the switch scam, so what should
that tell any thinking human being? Just ask Pagano where the ID
science went.
Past thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/cd9c35a1b94d1b42?hl=en
The anti-evoltion posters for the last couple of weeks:
Ray is still as badly off as ever. I am sure that adman and spinny
would be glad to know that they are "atheists." Ray is the only real
Christian posting to TO (in his mind). He as claimed to be the only
real Christian and the only real creationist posting, so the rest of
this list may just be pretenders.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/b2be59714a2524be?hl=en
Nando is still free unless he is posting from confinment.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/dee16cd6bfb64830?hl=en
Gerard needs to post more so that his true looniness will be exposed
more often.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/01d99c780a00efb6?hl=en
Pagano is still as bogus and vacuous as ever.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/e206a7d2c8eaddaa?hl=en
Igotskillz22: There should be some kind of code for honesty in nyms.
When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect. Past
bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel, all-
seeing-eye and elder. If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you would
have a better idea of what to expect.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/99acc47b7d7459fa?hl=en
Ganesh: There seems to be some Indian religious interest.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/b7e1dc140188394d?hl=en
NashT: Beats me why he is still posting.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/3de6a6ce99045110?hl=en
Backspace: If he could really redefine reality he would have an
argument.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/1587036aea9721d7?hl=en
Kalkidas: Close to Ganesh.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/ea04c8930e644c82?hl=en
The last rendition of adman/elder? With the loss of adman the posting
volume on TO may have been cut to less than half what it was. He was
about the last cretin that was willing to keep putting up the long
refuted anti-evolution arguments.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/71d95bf63e5249c8?hl=en
Tapehead?
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/f959c740df355d41?hl=en
This is a pretty pathetic list. To get a better idea of how bogus the
anti-evolution movement is anyone interested should check out the
previous threads.
I usually miss a few so add to the list if you can.
Ron Okimoto
Frank J
>
> Nando is still free unless he is posting from confinment.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/dee16cd6bfb64830?hl=en
>
> Gerard needs to post more so that his true looniness will be exposed
>
> Pagano is still as bogus and vacuous as ever.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/e206a7d2c8eaddaa?hl=en
>
> Igotskillz22: There should be some kind of code for honesty in nyms.
> When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect. Past
> bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel, all-
> seeing-eye and elder. If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you would
>
> Ganesh: There seems to be some Indian religious interest.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/b7e1dc140188394d?hl=en
>
> NashT: Beats me why he is still posting.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/3de6a6ce99045110?hl=en
>
> Backspace: If he could really redefine reality he would have an
> argument.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/1587036aea9721d7?hl=en
>
>
> The last rendition of adman/elder? With the loss of adman the posting
> volume on TO may have been cut to less than half what it was. He was
> about the last cretin that was willing to keep putting up the long
> refuted anti-evolution arguments.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/71d95bf63e5249c8?hl=en
>
>
> This is a pretty pathetic list. To get a better idea of how bogus the
> anti-evolution movement is anyone interested should check out the
> previous threads.
>
> I usually miss a few so add to the list if you can.
>
> Ron Okimoto
How about Timothy "no contiguous breeding population" Sutter? Now
there is one unique troll. AFAIK he was only on the one TO thread, but
has a bizarre habit of replying to his own posts in a cascade. He
knows better than to answer my usual "what happened when" questions.
Ron O
Stutter hasn't posted recently. I only went back a couple of weeks,
but he was only involved in a couple of threads and I might have
missed them when I was looking.
Timothy Sutter:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.misc/msg/6c05865e72b194df?hl=en
Ron Okimoto
raven1
wrote:
>Igotskillz22: There should be some kind of code for honesty in nyms.
>When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect. Past
>bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel, all-
>seeing-eye and elder. If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you would
>have a better idea of what to expect.
>http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/99acc47b7d7459fa?hl=en
His nym refers to his (self-perceived) poker playing ability; he's a
long time nutjob from rec.gambling.poker, who also goes by "La Cosa
Nostradamus".
jillery
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:32:23 -0800 (PST), Ron O <rokim...@cox.net>
If there isn't some kind of Internet Law relating to bad spelling with
the letter "Z", there should be.
rmacfarl
"jillery" <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:59605d57-052a-4908...@x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
[ Dives for cover... :-) ]
John Wilkins
<rmac...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
I, on the other hand, think we should be able to use any spelling that
takes our fancy, so long as it was used at least once in the past 800
years...
rmacfarl
"John Wilkins" <jo...@wilkins.id.au> wrote in message
news:140320101656479208%jo...@wilkins.id.au...
[Bloody accomodationists! mutter, mutter , mutter...]
Jenny6833A
> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
fluently.
:-)
Jenny
John Wilkins
<b17ed72c-e964-4697...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Jenny6833A <Jenny...@aol.com> wrote:
It's a bird that can say "Wanna cracker", isn't it?
Wombat
Lori?
Wombat
Michael Siemon
John Wilkins <jo...@wilkins.id.au> wrote:
You got something against Alfred the Whatever's spelling?
Sapient Fridge
<b17ed72c-e964-4697...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Jenny6833A <Jenny...@aol.com> writes
>On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
>> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
>> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
>> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
>A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
>to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even better.
>British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
>an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
>fluently.
Lori is good at tongue twisting though, she's had lots of practise:
Red lorry, yellow lorry, red lorry, yellow lorry...
--
sapient_...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
Grok: http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org * nuke a spammer *
Find: http://www.samspade.org http://www.netdemon.net * today *
Kill: http://mail-abuse.com http://au.sorbs.net http://spamhaus.org
John Wilkins
<mlsiemon-94782A...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
Michael Siemon <mlsi...@sonic.net> wrote:
He's just some Saxon mother's son.
D9000
wrote:
> In message
> <b17ed72c-e964-4697-860d-ca04d9f38...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> Jenny6833A <Jenny68...@aol.com> writes
>
> >On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> >> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> >> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> >A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
> >to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
>
> Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
> foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
> and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even better.
>
> >British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
> >an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
> >fluently.
>
> Lori is good at tongue twisting though, she's had lots of practise:
>
> Red lorry, yellow lorry, red lorry, yellow lorry...
Oh, truck off.
Burkhard
wrote:
> In message
> <b17ed72c-e964-4697-860d-ca04d9f38...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> >> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> >> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> >A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
> >to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
>
> Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
> foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
> and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even better.
>
Tell that to my very good friend, Mr Throatwobbler Mangrove
> >British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
> >an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
> >fluently.
>
> Lori is good at tongue twisting though, she's had lots of practise:
>
> Red lorry, yellow lorry, red lorry, yellow lorry...
> --
> sapient_usene...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer *
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net * today *
jillery
> "jillery" <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
If you want a battle on dumb spelling rulez, I'll stick with the
colonies. At least we got rid of "u" in "color" but why we stuck with
so many other arcane and inane spelling gotchas from the Crown is
beyond me. An irony here is that the country that imposed reason on
weights and measures (France) is also the single largest source of
spelling nonsense. One letter, one sound, and vicy versy. New sounds
require new letters. No more BS about changing the spelling of
foreign locations just to help pass a new trade agreement. And here's
a thought; if the sound is silent, don't spell it.
Kermit
But they *used to be pronounced(1). Once we started printing books,
spelling started to coagulate even as pronunciation continued to
change over time, albeit more slowly than before. Do you really want
to have to learn to spell like Valley Girls pronounce words? (I'm
starting to hear scientists on NPR talking like what we used to call
valley girls. I assume they're young scientists.) Or my southern
relatives ("Tahyet one rat over thar.") God knows how the *British
would pronounce English. And the single largest group of English
speakers is probably the Indians...
The problem is that we have multiple spelling systems, mostly
depending on whether the words came from Anglo-Saxon or Greek or Latin
or Norman French or Mexican Spanish or Elizabethan epithets. If we had
one set of rules for spelling and pronunciation, f'rners could learn
to spell. Or Yankees, for that matter.
(1) Somewhere...
Kermit
Ron O
>
> >On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> >> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> >> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> >A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
> >to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
>
> Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
> foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
> and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even better.
So to be consistent a farmer can have one shoop and Tom and Jerry
cartoons are correct when the cat says "I hate those meeses to
pieces?"
Ron Okimoto
>
> >British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
> >an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
> >fluently.
>
> Lori is good at tongue twisting though, she's had lots of practise:
>
> Red lorry, yellow lorry, red lorry, yellow lorry...
> --
> sapient_usene...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer *
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net * today *
Wombat
>
> >On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> >> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> >> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> >A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. Then I went
> >to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
>
> Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
> foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
> and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even better.
There is a Finnish group called Nightwish who do a version of "Walking
in the Air". It always cracks me up when the singer sings 'willages'
rather than "villages".
Wombat
>
> >British vocabulary was even worse. It took a long time to accept that
> >an articulated Lori wasn't a local lass who spoke clearly and
> >fluently.
>
> Lori is good at tongue twisting though, she's had lots of practise:
>
> Red lorry, yellow lorry, red lorry, yellow lorry...
> --
> sapient_usene...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer *
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net * today *
jillery
> On Mar 14, 4:16�am, Sapient Fridge <use_reply_addr...@spamsights.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In message
> > <b17ed72c-e964-4697-860d-ca04d9f38...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > Jenny6833A <Jenny68...@aol.com> writes
>
> > >On Mar 13, 11:27 pm, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > >> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> > >> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> > >> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> > >A year in Limeyland forever ruined my ability to spell. �Then I went
> > >to France, and figured out where British spelling came from.
>
> > Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
> > foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps, gooses
> > and mouses mistakes. �Place name pronunciation can be even better.
>
> So to be consistent a farmer can have one shoop and Tom and Jerry
> cartoons are correct when the cat says "I hate those meeses to
> pieces?"
>
> Ron Okimoto
Or is it "I hate those meeses to peeses."?
jillery
Who decided that language can evolve but spelling can't?
Ron O
I might back off on meese, but not for moose, and if they are going to
be consistent why don't we all live in towns full of hice instead of
houses? Why don't we have lice infesting mice in all our hice?
Ron Okimoto
hersheyh
>
> Nando is still free unless he is posting from confinment.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/dee16cd6bfb64830?hl=en
>
> Gerard needs to post more so that his true looniness will be exposed
>
> Pagano is still as bogus and vacuous as ever.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/e206a7d2c8eaddaa?hl=en
>
> Igotskillz22: There should be some kind of code for honesty in nyms.
> When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect. �Past
> bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel, all-
> seeing-eye and elder. �If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you would
>
> Ganesh: �There seems to be some Indian religious interest.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/b7e1dc140188394d?hl=en
>
> NashT: �Beats me why he is still posting.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/3de6a6ce99045110?hl=en
>
> Backspace: �If he could really redefine reality he would have an
>
> Kalkidas: �Close to Ganesh.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/ea04c8930e644c82?hl=en
>
> The last rendition of adman/elder? �With the loss of adman the posting
> volume on TO may have been cut to less than half what it was. �He was
> about the last cretin that was willing to keep putting up the long
> refuted anti-evolution arguments.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/71d95bf63e5249c8?hl=en
>
>
> This is a pretty pathetic list. �To get a better idea of how bogus the
> anti-evolution movement is anyone interested should check out the
> previous threads.
>
> I usually miss a few so add to the list if you can.
>
> Ron Okimoto
Almost enough to make one long for Nyikos. Almost. Not quite. Not
enough to make one long for Ed Conrad or Ted Holden and a score of
others. Sean Pitman became a one-note horn long before he decided he
had run out of anything interesting to say.
Frank J
The saddest case was Zoe. After a few years of detailed and
imaginative (to me at least) Isochron posts, she disappeared for a
while, then returned with some half-hearted "design" arguments, then
disappeared again. Possibly for good, given that the latest post I can
find is from Dec. 2007.
Mike Lyle
>>
>> Most of the fun of the English language comes from watching Johnny
>> foreigner make a mess of the spelling, not to mention the sheeps,
>> gooses and mouses mistakes. Place name pronunciation can be even
>> better.
Brits themselves have more than enough trouble with Brit place-names.
>
> There is a Finnish group called Nightwish who do a version of "Walking
> in the Air". It always cracks me up when the singer sings 'willages'
> rather than "villages".
>
One of Al-Jazeera's Pakistan-and-environs correspondents, Kamal Hyder,
speaks absolutely immaculate written English, but just can't say "v"
when he needs to. "Conwoys of wehicles passing through willages..."
[...]
--
Mike.
Free Lunch
wrote in talk.origins:
When you hear it spoken spelling isn't obvious.
Free Lunch
wrote in talk.origins:
Prescriptive descriptivists or, maybe the descriptive prescriptivists. I
get confused.
Free Lunch
<rmac...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in talk.origins:
'Bout as bad as that Johnson guy.
josephus
catch fire and have a nervous breakdown. my spelling looks like
gibberish (I wonder if that is why I get ignored)
josephus
--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter
Its not what you know that gets you in trouble
Its what you know that aint so. -- Josh Billings
josephus
vowels and consonants are mostly constant. Since that written
language was in use for 3000 years. they took a language that had a
vowel shift and ignored. it. Ben Johnson stablized the spelling of
English just before the last english shift. most of the strangeness in
English has to do with Ben Johnson and his spelling algorithm flew flu
for example. these words are not agnates cognates or anything but
allophones.
David Fritzinger
<72b0e13b-cb68-40c9...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Ron O <roki...@cox.net> wrote:
And, why did my wife just buy 2 blice?
Ron O
> In article
> <72b0e13b-cb68-40c9-b6c8-e0204033d...@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
If culture permitted, most men would likely perfer multiple spice.
Ron Okimoto
Kleuskes & Moos
> In article
> <mlsiemon-94782A.00522714032...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
>
>
>
> Michael Siemon <mlsie...@sonic.net> wrote:
> > In article <140320101656479208%j...@wilkins.id.au>,
> > John Wilkins <j...@wilkins.id.au> wrote:
>
> > > In article <hnhvkt$2d...@news.eternal-september.org>, rmacfarl
> > > <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > "jillery" <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Ah... He's a saxophone (french are francophones, after all...)
Kleuskes & Moos
Spicy...
<grin> I was waiting for it...
Kleuskes & Moos
wrote:
I bet his english is better than you pashtun, or finnish...
Mike Lyle
> On Mar 14, 6:46 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> Wombat wrote:
>>
>> Brits themselves have more than enough trouble with Brit place-names.
>>
>>> There is a Finnish group called Nightwish who do a version of
>>> "Walking in the Air". It always cracks me up when the singer sings
>>> 'willages' rather than "villages".
>>
>> One of Al-Jazeera's Pakistan-and-environs correspondents, Kamal
>> Hyder, speaks absolutely immaculate written English, but just can't
>> say "v" when he needs to. "Conwoys of wehicles passing through
>> willages..." [...]
>>
>> --
>> Mike.
>
> I bet his english is better than you pashtun, or finnish...
Your point, ma'am?
--
Mike.
Ron O
Only if you are lucky.
>
> <grin> I was waiting for it...-
Kleuskes & Moos
You may be the butt of the joke in all languages except english.
Mike Lyle
As it happens, I wouldn't be; not in all of them, at any rate. But even
if I were, I'd make no apology for following up on Vombat's introduction
of a perfectly harmless theme.
Ray Martinez
> When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect. �Past
> bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel, all-
> seeing-eye and elder. �If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you would
>
> Ganesh: �There seems to be some Indian religious interest.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/b7e1dc140188394d?hl=en
>
> NashT: �Beats me why he is still posting.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/3de6a6ce99045110?hl=en
>
> Backspace: �If he could really redefine reality he would have an
> argument.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/1587036aea9721d7?hl=en
>
> Kalkidas: �Close to Ganesh.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/ea04c8930e644c82?hl=en
>
> The last rendition of adman/elder? �With the loss of adman the posting
> volume on TO may have been cut to less than half what it was. �He was
> about the last cretin that was willing to keep putting up the long
> refuted anti-evolution arguments.http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/71d95bf63e5249c8?hl=en
>
> Tapehead?http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/f959c740df355d41?hl=en
>
> This is a pretty pathetic list. �To get a better idea of how bogus the
> anti-evolution movement is anyone interested should check out the
> previous threads.
>
> I usually miss a few so add to the list if you can.
>
> Ron Okimoto
The monthly pack of lies.
Okimoto's schtick: assert no arguments exist against evolution. Anyone
can call Ronnies bluff and check for themself. If the Darwinist would
lie about something that can so easily be verified then they will lie,
and have lied, about complicated scientific evidence.
Newbies: Ron also claims to be a Christian, yet he sees nothing wrong
in rejecting the Biblical explanation of species while siding with
Atheist fanatic Richard Dawkins concerning the same. What better
evidence of delusion could there be?
Ray (anti-evolutionist)
josephus
> have lied about complicated scientific evidence.
>
> Newbies: Ron also claims to be a Christian, yet he sees nothing wrong
> could there be?
>
> Ray (anti-evolutionist)
>
Ray wears his stupidity like a badge of honor. It is true that almost
anything Rays says can be refuted. especially what he says about
science. Science looks very dimly on people that fake science. we call
them psuedoscienctists and peer review reviles them. but Ray is not.
he is a creationist nitwit.
Kleuskes & Moos
wrote:
> Kleuskes & Moos wrote:
> > On Mar 14, 11:08 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >> Kleuskes & Moos wrote:
> >>> On Mar 14, 6:46 pm, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Wombat wrote:
> >> [...]
>
> >>>> Brits themselves have more than enough trouble with Brit
> >>>> place-names.
>
> >>>>> There is a Finnish group called Nightwish who do a version of
> >>>>> "Walking in the Air". It always cracks me up when the singer sings
> >>>>> 'willages' rather than "villages".
>
> >>>> One of Al-Jazeera's Pakistan-and-environs correspondents, Kamal
> >>>> Hyder, speaks absolutely immaculate written English, but just can't
> >>>> say "v" when he needs to. "Conwoys of wehicles passing through
> >>>> willages..." [...]
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Mike.
>
> >>> I bet his english is better than you pashtun, or finnish...
>
> >> Your point, ma'am?
>
> > You may be the butt of the joke in all languages except english.
>
> As it happens, I wouldn't be; not in all of them, at any rate.
You think you speak all languages without any funny accent? Or are you
so culturally jaded you are convince that everybody speaks yours?
> But even if I were, I'd make no apology for following up on Vombat's introduction
> of a perfectly harmless theme.
Sure...
raven1
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Newbies: Ron also claims to be a Christian, yet he sees nothing wrong
>about siding with Richard Dawkins. What better evidence of delusion
>could there be?
Ron and Richard Dawkins presumably also agree that the Earth is an
oblate spheroid that revolves around the Sun, that 1+1=2 in Base-10,
that Barack Obama is the current President of the US, and that E=mc^2.
Your position on these issues is...?
chibiabos
<70e87a85-cecb-4de2...@z1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, Ray
Martinez <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The monthly pack of lies.
>
> Okimoto's schtick: assert no arguments exist against evolution. Anyone
> can call Ronnies bluff and check for themself. If the Darwinist would
> lie about something that can easily be verfied then they will lie and
> have lied about complicated scientific evidence.
>
> Newbies: Ron also claims to be a Christian, yet he sees nothing wrong
> about siding with Richard Dawkins. What better evidence of delusion
> could there be?
>
> Ray (anti-evolutionist)
>
Pegged much?
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
Dan Drake
(in article <hnhvkt$2df$1...@news.eternal-september.org>):
>
> "jillery" <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:59605d57-052a-4908...@x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 13, 12:26 pm, raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:32:23 -0800 (PST), Ron O
>>> <rokim...@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Igotskillz22: There should be some kind of code for honesty
>>>> in nyms.
>>>> When you have to lie in your nym the cause has to be suspect.
>>>> Past
>>>> bogus nyms have been things like Philosopher7, adman's Uriel,
>>>> all-
>>>> seeing-eye and elder. If they had nyms like Igotsnuttin you
>>>> would
>>>> have a better idea of what to expect.
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/99acc47b7d7459fa?hl=en
>>>
>>> His nym refers to his (self-perceived) poker playing ability;
>>> he's a
>>> long time nutjob from rec.gambling.poker, who also goes by "La
>>> Cosa
>>> Nostradamus".
>>
>> If there isn't some kind of Internet Law relating to bad
>> spelling with
>> the letter "Z", there should be.
>>
>
> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>
> [ Dives for cover... :-) ]
>
You're taking a stand against the Oxford English Dictionary, then? Let no one
accuse you of chauvinism.
Last time I looked(*), the OED was still recommending the classical -ize over
the frenchy -ise, as it has for a hundred years or so.
"...there is no reason why in English the special French spelling should be
followed, in opposition to that which is at once etymological and phonetic."
(*) 2010-03-14 19:13 PDT:
http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50122648?single=1&query_type=word&querywor
d=ize&first=1&max_to_show=10
We Yanks, as you know, are solidly traditionalist.
--
Dan Drake
d...@dandrake.com
Ron O
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:27:35 -0700, rmacfarl wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "jillery" <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> d=ize&first=1&max_to_show=10
>
> We Yanks, as you know, are solidly traditionalist.
>
> --
> Dan Drake
Gag me with a spoon.
Ron Okimoto
Wombat
(Kenneth Williams voice) I know that.
Besides an articulated Lori would be double jointed rather than
articulate.
Wombat
Ron O
For some men, less articulate and double jointed, would be the
preferred Lori.
I probably should appologize for this one in advance.
Ron Okimoto
Burkhard
Mhhhh.
Von Bat
Vonbat
Vombat
Wombat
Typically phonetic change in name spelling after immigration into
country with different language, or something more sinister?
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <8p2rp55btn6kr15jv...@4ax.com>):
I suspect that Ray-ray holds that the Earth has four corners, that 1+1 = 3 if
the first 1 is male and the second is female (and any other combination is an
abomination and those involved should be stoned) and that Barrack Obama is a
Kenyan Muslim who cannot possibly be Prez.
Hey, Ray-ray, was I close?
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
David Hare-Scott
>>
>> If you want to get rid of bad spelling with "Z"s, start by
>> eliminating American English spell checkers. I'm sick of them
>> trying to bastardi/z/^se bastardise my spelling.
>>
>
> If you want a battle on dumb spelling rulez, I'll stick with the
> colonies. At least we got rid of "u" in "color" but why we stuck with
> so many other arcane and inane spelling gotchas from the Crown is
> beyond me. An irony here is that the country that imposed reason on
> weights and measures (France) is also the single largest source of
> spelling nonsense. One letter, one sound, and vicy versy. New sounds
> require new letters. No more BS about changing the spelling of
> foreign locations just to help pass a new trade agreement. And here's
> a thought; if the sound is silent, don't spell it.
U shud run for ofis. Lyk Ivor F who ran for the senut on the singul isu of
speling reform. He lost his deposit all the time but fort the gud fite.
His name reeli was Ivor F.
David
Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:27:35 -0700, rmacfarl wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > "jillery" <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> d=ize&first=1&max_to_show=10
>
> We Yanks, as you know, are solidly traditionalist.
>
> --
> Dan Drake
> d...@dandrake.com
Yep. -ise or -ize from Greek izo. So it's slightly more correct to
use -ize for adjectifying a noun than -ise. That said, Americans have
been known to over use the "z" where it is not, alas, sourced from
Izo.
The swing to -ise has been mostly in reaction to Americans using -ize,
in a misguided attempt to distance their spelling from said
colonists. When all is said and done, use of the Z is one of
America's lesser crimes against English. And even they are paling to
insignificance compared to the assault from bad education, mobile
phones and other sources of bad grammar and spelling that assaults
from most nations now.
end of rant
Wombat
I ignored it as either a typo or a (unfortunately lame) joke.
Wombat
jillery
Rite.
Kalkidas
news:1e48829b-afd2-4d55...@v20g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...
> It is time for another "By their fruits" thread. Several of the
> regulars have dropped out or been expelled for pretty stupid
> behavior. They didn't do anything really bad, just stupid. Not much
> changed except the volume of posting. When there was never much in
> the way of viable argument on the anti-evolution side there was no
> noticable improvement in the posting quality. So adman, Uriel et al
> is gone, Spinny-HighQ seems to have started his own group and I don't
> know what Tapestry, Picasso et al is doing. Glenn hasn't posted for
> sometime. I hope that he is allright. He has been a regular for a
> long time even if his posts degerated to snipping from the sidelines.
Get some therapy. And remember, "the scientific method" is not a name for a
particular school of dramatic arts.
Walter Bushell
Why is that groups are judged by their fruits, rather than, for example,
their nuts or flakes?
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <proto-D75B05....@news.panix.com>):
>
>
> Why is that groups are judged by their fruits,
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
> rather than, for example,
> their nuts or flakes?
That'd be a granola bar.
Mike Lyle
so important to you. Of course, negatives can do funny things to English
sentences, so I can appreciate your confusion.
Mike Lyle
needed to lighten up a trifle*. It didn't work: but I take pusillanimous
refuge in maintaining that you started it.
*Insert food gag if required.
--
Mike.
Mike Lyle
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:57:43 -0400, Walter Bushell wrote
> (in article <proto-D75B05....@news.panix.com>):
>
>>
>>
>> Why is that groups are judged by their fruits,
>
> Not that there's anything wrong with that...
>
>> rather than, for example,
>> their nuts or flakes?
>
> That'd be a granola bar.
Or most of the creationists who've ever graced this group. (Which, I
assume, is where Walter wanted us to go with this. I thought he was
being rather witty.)
--
Mike.
bpuharic
which has cured disease, extended life and put man on the moon
vs your idiotic religion which excels only in making some humans
'untouchable'
>
>
Ron O
> "Ron O" <rokim...@cox.net> wrote in message
You probably do not know the Biblical quote. About par for the course
for you. Why recommend therapy for someone else when it obviously
didn't do you much good or were you even worse off before? Really,
you can't make this junk up. The anti-evolution faction really is
this badly off. What they need is a real argument, but you won't see
one put up in this or any other thread. Instead you just get denial.
Ron Okimoto
Free Lunch
talk.origins:
As long as it's our traditions.
William Morse
> On Mar 14, 8:28 am, Kermit <unrestrained_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 14, 4:50 am, jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 14, 2:27 am, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>>>> "jillery" <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> colonies. At least we got rid of "u" in "color" but why we stuck with
>>> so many other arcane and inane spelling gotchas from the Crown is
>>> beyond me. An irony here is that the country that imposed reason on
>>> weights and measures (France) is also the single largest source of
>>> spelling nonsense. One letter, one sound, and vicy versy. New sounds
>>> require new letters. No more BS about changing the spelling of
>>> foreign locations just to help pass a new trade agreement. And here's
>>> a thought; if the sound is silent, don't spell it.
>> spelling started to coagulate even as pronunciation continued to
>> change over time, albeit more slowly than before. Do you really want
>> to have to learn to spell like Valley Girls pronounce words? (I'm
>> starting to hear scientists on NPR talking like what we used to call
>> valley girls. I assume they're young scientists.) Or my southern
>> relatives ("Tahyet one rat over thar.") God knows how the *British
>> would pronounce English. And the single largest group of English
>> speakers is probably the Indians...
>>
>> The problem is that we have multiple spelling systems, mostly
>> depending on whether the words came from Anglo-Saxon or Greek or Latin
>> or Norman French or Mexican Spanish or Elizabethan epithets. If we had
>> one set of rules for spelling and pronunciation, f'rners could learn
>> to spell. Or Yankees, for that matter.
>>
>> (1) Somewhere...
>>
>> Kermit
>
> Who decided that language can evolve but spelling can't?
>
Nobody. German and Spanish spelling have both been reformed - in both
languages in general when you read it you know how to pronounce it. As a
contrast, tell me how to pronounce "Youghiogheny River". Expanding on
that, tell me how to pronounce "ough".
My platform when I run for President of the US is going to be: switch to
the metric system, fix English spelling, outlaw drug ads on TV,
authorize the death penalty for spammers, and get rid of the penny.
John Vreeland
>Nando is still free unless he is posting from confinment.
>http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/dee16cd6bfb64830?hl=en
>
LOL Did the evilutionists destroy his freedom? Just as he always
feared.
--
My years on the mudpit that is Usnenet have taught me one important thing: three Creation Scientists can have a serious conversation, if two of them are sock puppets.
John Wilkins
<wdNOSP...@verizon.net> wrote:
It's too tough, though, to just put this on a bough, and run it through.
>
> My platform when I run for President of the US is going to be: switch to
> the metric system, fix English spelling, outlaw drug ads on TV,
> authorize the death penalty for spammers, and get rid of the penny.
>
What, legalise all drugs and criminalise unlicensed and uncontrolled
distribution isn't one of them? What are you, a conservative?
John Wilkins
<pr...@panix.com> wrote:
> Why is that groups are judged by their fruits, rather than, for example,
> their nuts or flakes?
The Muesli Principle
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <hnmqq...@news7.newsguy.com>):
Sounds like a plan.
> fix English spelling,
Good luck with that...
> outlaw drug ads on TV,
> authorize the death penalty for spammers,
No, no, no. The solution for both of the above is simple: make those who push
the stuff use the stuff. In carload lots.
> and get rid of the penny.
Force toll-booths and buse systems to take them.
jillery
Quite. I remember reading a good justification for spelling "fish" as
"ghouti". The point was to show how counter-intuitive English
spelling rules are. I agree.
Walter Bushell
John Wilkins <jo...@wilkins.id.au> wrote:
The _Cereal Killer_.
Mark Isaak
> On Mar 15, 10:36 pm, William Morse <wdNOSPAMMo...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> jillery wrote:
>> > On Mar 14, 8:28 am, Kermit <unrestrained_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Mar 14, 4:50 am, jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> On Mar 14, 2:27 am, "rmacfarl" <rmacf...@alphalink.com.au> wrote:
>> >>>> [...]
>> > Who decided that language can evolve but spelling can't?
>>
>> Nobody. German and Spanish spelling have both been reformed - in both
>> languages in general when you read it you know how to pronounce it. As
>> a contrast, tell me how to pronounce "Youghiogheny River". Expanding on
>> that, tell me how to pronounce "ough".
>
> Quite. I remember reading a good justification for spelling "fish" as
> "ghouti". The point was to show how counter-intuitive English spelling
> rules are. I agree.
It's spelled "ghoti". Good grief, kids these days can't spell anything.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"It is certain, from experience, that the smallest grain of natural
honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct, than the most
pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems." - D. Hume
Virgil
Mark Isaak <eci...@earthlink.net> wrote:
IIRC, it was part of G.B. Shaw's appeal for English spelling reform.
His justification was
'gh' as in 'enough'
'o' as in 'women'
'ti' as in 'nation'
should combine into 'ghoti', to be pronounced the same as 'fish'.
Dan Drake
(in article <hnl4ha$9qu$1...@news.albasani.net>):
Which reminds me of the conclusive argument against spelling reform.
It has been tried, you know. G B Shaw put up a prize for a truly phonetic
spelling system in his will. One day at the college bookstore, long ago, I
saw the book that had been published by the prize committee, with a sample of
the winning system, in the form of "Androcles and the Lion", as I recall. An
entertaining play, and it was not hard to learn to read the text, if slowly.
What's more, it was entirely natural. Provided, of course, you spoke the
King's English as it was spoken in 1959 or so.
You see the problem, of course. We have here a language that can't even stand
an Academy to keep the grammar and vocabulary from going to hell; and
somebody thinks it will accept a spelling system based on the phonetic
peculiarities of one social class in one section of one not exceedingly
extensive country at one time? Right.
BTW, I read at one time in a highly reliable source (Wikipedia, ha ha ha)
that compared to the 18th century, writing has been more conservative in the
British section than in the American (big discovery, I know) but
pronunciation has been quite the reverse. Contemplate your honoured ancestors
speaking rhotically? Can you stand it?
Tomahto, tomayto, tomayto, tomahto, let's call the whole thing off.
--
Dan Drake
d...@dandrake.com
Esa Riihonen
There is also this Mark Twain story where he goes through rationalizing
the English spelling - I assume the process and specially the end result
should be funny. Never seen the the humor there - the resulting system
looks more or less exactly the way a Finn would write English :)
Now consider the horror, four year olds would regularly learn to read
more or less by themselves after first memorizing the alphabets.
Cheers, Esa(R)
--
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea - William Black
Mike Lyle
[...]
>
> BTW, I read at one time in a highly reliable source (Wikipedia, ha ha
> ha) that compared to the 18th century, writing has been more
> conservative in the British section than in the American (big
> discovery, I know)
Actually, that surprises me: but I suppose American strict retention of
the quasi-subjunctive is balanced by BritEtc's preservation of the
perfect tenses.
> but pronunciation has been quite the reverse.
> Contemplate your honoured ancestors speaking rhotically? Can you
> stand it?
Ancestors? A fair proportion (a third? Afraid ICBA to look it up this
evening) of _contemporaries_ still do it. No surprise or discomfort
involved.
> Tomahto, tomayto, tomayto, tomahto, let's call the whole thing off.
As my sister gravely informs me, "potato" is short for "potatoforte".
--
Mike.
Free Lunch
<mike_l...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in talk.origins:
Then what is short for pianoforte?
josephus
Tuahacana (twokany) for real.
josephus
--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter
Its not what you know that gets you in trouble
Its what you know that aint so. -- Josh Billings
jillery
It's been a long time since I was called a kid. Perhaps that why I
don't remember how to spell it.
jillery
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 04:09:21 -0700, David Hare-Scott wrote
Makes me wonder how the Germans and Spanish managed it. Spelling is
already based on a presumptive model of pronunciation, so
standardizing spelling to correlate to a standard idiom isn't the
definitive argument against it that you suggest.
Steven L.
news:70e87a85-cecb-4de2...@z1g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
> Newbies: Ron also claims to be a Christian, yet he sees nothing wrong
> about siding with Richard Dawkins. What better evidence of delusion
> could there be?
The question of whether Christianity and the ToE are epistemiologically
compatible cuts all ways from Sunday.
Creationists like yourself (old-earth) and Ken Ham (young-earth) are
actually on the same side as atheist evolutionists like Jerry Coyne, in
asserting that these two logical systems are not epistemiologically
compatible.
But certainly the burden of proof isn't on any of you.
The burden of proof is on "modernist" Christians, to explain how they
reconcile the two beliefs *logically*. (It's not enough just to claim
they can keep both ideas in their head at the same time; Orwell
deconstructed "doublethink" 70 years ago.)
And I've noticed that we never seem to have such arguments here on this
NG. Modernist Christians here never explain *exactly* how God is
supposed to work through evolution.
Did God send that meteorite here 65 million years ago?
Even Ken Miller has shied away from that one.
-- Steven L.
jillery
> "Ray Martinez" <pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I'm not sure I recognize who has the burden of proof here. I don't
understand why you give creationists a pass on this one and place the
burden entirely on "modernist" christians. Can you elaborate?
raven1
I don't understand where the problem is here.
How many stars are there in how many hundreds of billions of galaxies?
Of those stars, how many have planets capable of sustaining life?
Where's the theological problem with God reaching out to a species
that evolved enough intellectually on one of those gazillions of
worlds to respond to Him?
aganunitsi
> Where's the theological problem with God reaching out to a species
> that evolved enough intellectually on one of those gazillions of
> worlds to respond to Him?
It perplexes the Vatican, thus it is a theological problem.
bobsyo...@yahoo.com
"josephus" <dog...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:qt6dndL3rodijD3W...@earthlink.com...
without the phlem.
>>
>>
>> Quite. I remember reading a good justification for spelling "fish" as
>> "ghouti". The point was to show how counter-intuitive English
>> spelling rules are. I agree.
>>
>>
>>> My platform when I run for President of the US is going to be: switch to
>>> the metric system, fix English spelling, outlaw drug ads on TV,
>>> authorize the death penalty for spammers, and get rid of the penny.
What about POTHOLES?
( ....???? where the hell did they get "pot" holes from, anyway? Is that
where someone keeps their stash?
jillery
wrote:
<snip>
> What about POTHOLES?
> ( ....???? where the hell did they get "pot" holes from, anyway? Is that
> where someone keeps their stash?
A quickie etymological Google suggests the word refers to the
generally cylindrical shape and the containment properties thereby.
Such things are easy to do nowadays for anybody who interested in
finding answers for themselves.
<snip>
Ernest Major
<be798c8b-313f-4376...@e1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> writes
Perhaps potholes (sense 3) in roads were named after potholes (sense 2)
in rocky streambeds. (Sense 1 is an alternative name for a sinkhole, as
in Disappointment Pot, and the sport of potholing.)
--
alias Ernest Major
jillery
> In message
> <be798c8b-313f-4376-83d7-475b61423...@e1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> writes
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mar 17, 5:43 am, "PepsiFr...@teranews.com" <bobsyoung...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
>
> ><snip>
>
> >> What about POTHOLES?
> >> ( ....???? where the hell did they get "pot" holes from, anyway? Is that
> >> where someone keeps their stash?
>
> >A quickie etymological Google suggests the word refers to the
> >generally cylindrical shape and the containment properties thereby.
> >Such things are easy to do nowadays for anybody who interested in
> >finding answers for themselves.
>
> ><snip>
>
> Perhaps potholes (sense 3) in roads were named after potholes (sense 2)
> in rocky streambeds. (Sense 1 is an alternative name for a sinkhole, as
> in Disappointment Pot, and the sport of potholing.)
Works for me.
Ron O
> It is time for another "By their fruits" thread. Several of the
> regulars have dropped out or been expelled for pretty stupid
> behavior. They didn't do anything really bad, just stupid. Not much
> changed except the volume of posting. When there was never much in
> the way of viable argument on the anti-evolution side there was no
> noticable improvement in the posting quality. So adman, Uriel et al
> is gone, Spinny-HighQ seems to have started his own group and I don't
> know what Tapestry, Picasso et al is doing. Glenn hasn't posted for
> sometime. I hope that he is allright. He has been a regular for a
> long time even if his posts degerated to snipping from the sidelines.
>
SNIP:
What does anyone think is responsible for the posting volume to have
taken such a nose dive? Could adman have had that big of an effect in
getting people to post?
The contributions of the other anti-evolution posters have also been
below par. Hardly anyone is even trying to post anything of
relevance.
May add Humming to the list, but it is a question mark post and run.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/bc31c751671d0e84?hl=en
Pretty pathetic showing for the anti-evolution side this month. Most
of this thread was composed of off topic word games. Hey I
contributed so I am not knocking it, but that is about all there is to
discuss on this topic since intelligent design bit the dust and even
the ID perps gave up on it for a switch scam that doesn't even mention
that ID ever existed. There is a very simple reason why the "fruit"
of the anti-evolution movement are so badly off. It has probably
started to dawn on even the most willfully ignorant that something is
wrong with their cause. When dishonesty and bogousity are all that
you have for arguments only the ignorant, nut cases, incompetents and
basically dishonest will bother to tote the party line.
By their fruits you shall know them. How much more applicable to a
situation can a Biblical quote get?
To get a better idea of how fruity the anti-evolution factionis
lurkers should go to an earlier "By their fruits" thread and look up
the post of the regulars.
Past thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/cd9c35a1b94d1b42?hl=en
Ron Okimoto
Walter Bushell
Dan Drake <d...@dandrake.com> wrote:
And you lose you history. But spelling in English or American of 'Srine
is completely ghotiy.
Sapient Fridge
<ce52ba39-de13-4f40...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, Ron
O <roki...@cox.net> writes
<snip>
>What does anyone think is responsible for the posting volume to have
>taken such a nose dive? Could adman have had that big of an effect in
>getting people to post?
This was predicted:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/eec62d666ec77590
In which I wrote:
>Adman can be annoying, especially when he repeatedly posts stuff he
>*knows* has been thoroughly refuted, but as far as I can see he hasn't
>committed any bannable offences.
>
>I also suspect that if we banned people for simply being annoying then
>the group would probably become very boring very quickly.
--
sapient_...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
Grok: http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org * nuke a spammer *
Find: http://www.samspade.org http://www.netdemon.net * today *
Kill: http://mail-abuse.com http://au.sorbs.net http://spamhaus.org
Ron O
wrote:
> In message
> <ce52ba39-de13-4f40-aa1c-91d3c4252...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, Ron
> O <rokim...@cox.net> writes
>
> <snip>
>
> >What does anyone think is responsible for the posting volume to have
> >taken such a nose dive? Could adman have had that big of an effect in
> >getting people to post?
>
> This was predicted:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/eec62d666ec77590
>
> In which I wrote:
> >Adman can be annoying, especially when he repeatedly posts stuff he
> >*knows* has been thoroughly refuted, but as far as I can see he hasn't
> >committed any bannable offences.
>
> >I also suspect that if we banned people for simply being annoying then
> >the group would probably become very boring very quickly.
>
> --
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer *
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net * today *
Ron O
wrote:
> In message
> <ce52ba39-de13-4f40-aa1c-91d3c4252...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, Ron
>
> <snip>
>
> >What does anyone think is responsible for the posting volume to have
> >taken such a nose dive? Could adman have had that big of an effect in
> >getting people to post?
>
> This was predicted:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/eec62d666ec77590
>
> In which I wrote:
> >Adman can be annoying, especially when he repeatedly posts stuff he
> >*knows* has been thoroughly refuted, but as far as I can see he hasn't
> >committed any bannable offences.
>
> >I also suspect that if we banned people for simply being annoying then
> >the group would probably become very boring very quickly.
>
> --
> Grok:http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org* nuke a spammer *
> Find:http://www.samspade.orghttp://www.netdemon.net * today *
I also predicted that the posting volume would go down, but I was
thinking somewhere along the lines of 30%. It looks like it is down
by around 70% or more of what it was at the time of the last "By their
fruits" four months ago before adman started decreasing his posting
volume. The other anit-evolution posters have pretty much stopped
posting too. Who is left? Nando? Pags posts and runs about once a
week. NashT and glenn have disappeared. I haven't seen a post by
Pitman for a long time. I think I saw a post by backspace within the
last week. Even Ray isn't trying much at all.
There actually shouldn't be any regular anti-evolution posters. Once
they hang around enough to get clued into reality they should rethink
their positions. What happened to scientific creationism? Even the
ID perps dismissed the effort and tried their best to claim that they
were not scientific creationists even though a lot of them really are
scientific creationists. What happened to intelligent design? The
main IDiot scam artists ended up running a bait and switch scam on
their own creationist support base, and the switch scam is so bad that
it doesn't even mention that ID nor creationism ever existed. Not
only that, but the ID perps were running the bait and switch on their
supporters years before they lost in court in Dover. They knew that
ID didn't make the grade then, so what are they selling now? The
Dover school board members have claimed that the ID perps tried to run
the bait and switch on them, but they wouldn't take the switch scam,
so ID had it's pathetic day in court. Now all intelligent design is
used for is to fool the rubes into thinking that there might be some
viable controversy, but when they get the switch scam, the rubes find
out that creationism isn't part of any controversy worth mentioning in
the switch scam.
Why should the anti-evolution effort have any competent informed
supporters? Before ID lost in court, and it was apparent that the
bait and switch was going down I started claiming that the only ID
supporters left were ignorant, incompetent and or dishonest. That is
still true today, and will be true for as long as the bait and switch
keeps going down.
Anyone that doesn't believe that the bait and switch is happening,
just get your local school board to teach the wonderful science of
intelligent design, and watch how fast the switch scam comes in. The
last ignorant rubes to try to teach intelligent design were in Florida
early in 2009. Florida was a spectacular fiasco. Multiple school
boards and legislators claimed to want to teach the science of
intelligent design (this was years after Dover), around the end of
2008, but they had the bait and switch run in on them, and tragically
some of them bent over and took the switch scam from the same guys
that had lied to them about intelligent design. Even after the bait
and switch went down, during the next legislative session, some stupid
IDiot said that he was still going to introduce legislation to teach
intelligent design, and ended up having the bait and switch run on him
again. You can't make this junk up. I don't know of another attempt
since, and after Florida there shouldn't be another attempt, but it
isn't wise to under estimate how stupid the effort really is. Look
into it and find out what the creationist rubes in Florida got to
teach. Find out just what the switch scam is, and that creationism
and intelligent design aren't even mentioned and think about what that
means. All the creationist rubes get is an obfuscation scam designed
to keep the students as ignorant of reality as the rubes obviously
are. What should that tell any one with brains enough to evaluate the
situation?
I put up this thread every four months or so just so that anyone
interested can easily look up just what the anti-evolution effort has
to offer. I recall that adman didn't understand what the title of the
tread meant, and when he did find out he went even more bonkers than
he usually is. By their fruits you shall know them. What are the
fruits if the anti-evolution movement? What should that tell you
about the anti-evolution movement? Now that the anti-evolution
faction have reduced their posting efforts any interested parties will
have to look up their older posts.
Ron Okimoto
JennyB
> On Mar 14, 4:50 am, jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you want a battle on dumb spelling rulez, I'll stick with the
> > colonies. At least we got rid of "u" in "color" but why we stuck with
> > so many other arcane and inane spelling gotchas from the Crown is
> > beyond me. An irony here is that the country that imposed reason on
> > weights and measures (France) is also the single largest source of
> > spelling nonsense. One letter, one sound, and vicy versy. New sounds
> > require new letters. No more BS about changing the spelling of
> > foreign locations just to help pass a new trade agreement. And here's
> > a thought; if the sound is silent, don't spell it.
>
> But they *used to be pronounced(1). Once we started printing books,
> spelling started to coagulate even as pronunciation continued to
> change over time, albeit more slowly than before. Do you really want
> to have to learn to spell like Valley Girls pronounce words? (I'm
> starting to hear scientists on NPR talking like what we used to call
> valley girls. I assume they're young scientists.) Or my southern
> relatives ("Tahyet one rat over thar.") God knows how the *British
> would pronounce English. And the single largest group of English
> speakers is probably the Indians...
>
> The problem is that we have multiple spelling systems, mostly
> depending on whether the words came from Anglo-Saxon or Greek or Latin
> or Norman French or Mexican Spanish or Elizabethan epithets. If we had
> one set of rules for spelling and pronunciation, f'rners could learn
> to spell. Or Yankees, for that matter.
>
The obvious alternative is to keep the spelling and have a regular
pronunciation system that (unlike dear old received pronunciation)
actually conforms to it.
<quote>
Regular English Pronunciation (REP) is an attempt to open up a second
front in the battle to simplify the mapping between spoken and written
English. Designed by Mark Huckvale in 2002, REP is based on the
observation that if spelling can't be changed to match the
pronunciation, maybe the pronunciation can be changed to match the
spelling. Since pronunciation change requires little investment and
can take place over a number of generations, it is likely to be more
acceptable than spelling reform. REP is one suggestion for how English
would sound if it were pronounced the way it was spelled. You can view
REP as either a radical alternative to spelling reform (if you refuse
to allow any spelling changes ever), or as a complementary approach
(if you let pronunciation and spelling meet half way).</quote>
Burkhard
Or you can do it the German way, and leave it to Parliament and
ultimately the Constitutional court (NOT a good idea)
Cory Albrecht
Now that's just silly.
The problem is precisely because pronunciation has changed over time and
spelling has not.
Even if you get people to alter their pronunciation to the point where
it perfectly matched the spelling, it would eventually drift away again
and you'd need to recorrect. You'd end up in an endless cycle of drift
and correction.
And that assumes you even could get all speakers of a language to
willingly try to alter their speech like that in the first place.
Individuals try to change their accent usually because of real or
perceived social pressures such as to avoid discrimination or gain
acceptance into a group. People don't change their accents just because
you tell them to. You will need to provide that pressure such that is an
obvious detriment to keep talking they way they do now and to a value
for changing to the new way.
And the idea that all this would take little investment is just naïve.
First there is the time each person would have to spend practising this
new accent to use it naturally and comfortably. Second, how to do you
plan on getting everybody to use it? If you're going to mandate it's use
in TV, Movies and radio through legislation then you'll need to pay for
the training of all those people in the new pronunciation - how much do
you think that will cost? Even moreso if you're going to madate it as
the way government employees must speak while on the job.
el cid
WTF? RU serus LOL?
> Even if you get people to alter their pronunciation to the point where
> it perfectly matched the spelling, it would eventually drift away again
> and you'd need to recorrect. You'd end up in an endless cycle of drift
> and correction.
I've often pondered the vice vs. virtue of styles of fascism.
As the word is overloaded, I mean authoritarian enforcement
of standards and policies. One of the things that made Macs
easier was really standardization and a single vision of
the way to do things. Of course, if you knew a different
way already it was far less compelling, or if there was a
strong intuition mismatch it also didn't work, but it worked
very very well for many. The other side breed more innovation
but much of it died out even if it was good (weak effort
to be topical). Clearly some languages have been more
Mac-like and some more PC like.
Then I ponder what will happen when our computer overlords
take over and do a cost benefit analysis of how much effort
is being wasted parsing poorly pronounced, grammatically
sloppy and logically flawed requests from 'humans'. The
re-education policies of the Khmer Rouge will look like
a picnic.
Now please excuse me while I readjust my tin-foil hat.
Cory Albrecht
STFU. HTH. HAND. :-)
>
>> Even if you get people to alter their pronunciation to the point where
>> it perfectly matched the spelling, it would eventually drift away again
>> and you'd need to recorrect. You'd end up in an endless cycle of drift
>> and correction.
>
> I've often pondered the vice vs. virtue of styles of fascism.
> As the word is overloaded, I mean authoritarian enforcement
> of standards and policies. One of the things that made Macs
> easier was really standardization and a single vision of
> the way to do things. Of course, if you knew a different
> way already it was far less compelling, or if there was a
> strong intuition mismatch it also didn't work, but it worked
> very very well for many.
It may have worked well for many, but clearly a great many more never
saw a positive cost benefit for switching. While that may work in
free-market computers, it won't work for pronunciation reform.
> The other side breed more innovation
> but much of it died out even if it was good (weak effort
> to be topical). Clearly some languages have been more
> Mac-like and some more PC like.
>
> Then I ponder what will happen when our computer overlords
> take over and do a cost benefit analysis of how much effort
> is being wasted parsing poorly pronounced, grammatically
> sloppy and logically flawed requests from 'humans'. The
> re-education policies of the Khmer Rouge will look like
> a picnic.
So let me get this straight - you're advocating that we all learn to
speak C++ or Lisp? :-) Well, OK, as long as it's not SNOBOL.
JennyB
> Now that's just silly.
>
> The problem is precisely because pronunciation has changed over time and
> spelling has not.
>
> Even if you get people to alter their pronunciation to the point where
> it perfectly matched the spelling, it would eventually drift away again
> and you'd need to recorrect. You'd end up in an endless cycle of drift
> and correction.
>
That would be virtually impossible. It always amazes me, for example,
that many English pronounce "which" and "which" identically, but I'd
never do that, even if it were "proper."
REP is, at most, intended as a standard pronunciation for teaching
English. Even though it sounds a bit odd and Elizabethan, it is quite
understandable even on first encounter, so it provide a way to read
unfamiliar English words aloud and make your meaning clear to people
who do not share your native pronunciation system. They are likely, of
course, to immediately tell you how they would pronounce it, which you
are free to accept or ignore. If REP were to become well-known, it
might actually slow pronunciation drift, since native speakers would
also tend to use the REP version of words they had never heard before.