What if intelligent design had been legitimate science?

[RonO]

What if intelligent design had been legitimate science? The IDiots
should be thinking about that question, but IDiots don't do much
relevant thinking. What would things be like if IDiocy had worked out
and some legitimate science was ever accomplished?

For one thing the bait and switch scam would not have been needed for
the last decade and a half. There would be some actual ID science to be
discussing instead of IDiots like Dean and Eddie bending over and taking
the the switch scam junk that they get from the ID perps instead of any
ID science.

IDiocy would definitely be applicable to things like real CSI (crime
scene investigation) instead of just talking about the bogus IDiot CSI
(complex specified information). Archeologists would likely be using
it, and if we were lucky enough to have it apply to biological evolution
and genetics we could even be using it to help us select better
agricultural plants and animals.

So if IDiocy was legitimate science why is it that it's only function
today is to be used as bait for the creationist bait and switch scam
that creationists are running on themselves? The creationists keep
selling themselves the IDiocy, but all they ever get is the obfuscation
switch scam with no ID science in it at all. The public switch scam
doesn't even mention that IDiocy ever existed. The ID perps that sell
the ID scam to the rubes even claim that the switch scam has nothing to
do with IDiocy.

Why are there still IDiots like Dean and Eddie that bend over for the
switch scam? Were there any honest creationists that actually wanted
the ID science to make an appearance?

There have been IDiots that quit the ID scam and admitted that the ID
science never existed, but my guess is that they are still IDiots. Look
at Mike Gene and Bill. Look at ID perp's like Behe's and Denton's IDiot
alternatives that include biological evolution as fact.

So what would things be like if there had ever been any legitimate ID
science to discuss, and would any IDiots want to live in that reality?

Ron Okimoto

[T Pagano]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 06:05:20 -0500, RonO wrote:

> What if intelligent design had been legitimate science? The IDiots
> should be thinking about that question, but IDiots don't do much
> relevant thinking. What would things be like if IDiocy had worked out
> and some legitimate science was ever accomplished?

Notwithstanding his credentials, RonO wouldn't know legitimate science if
he tripped over it.

Considering ID isn't "legitimate" science the IDers, in 10 years, have
made it into a household concept. It doesn't seem to want to go away.
And its driving atheists, like RonO crazy. He can't stop writing about
it even though he doesn't know the first thing about it.

>
> For one thing the bait and switch scam would not have been needed for
> the last decade and a half. There would be some actual ID science to be
> discussing instead of IDiots like Dean and Eddie bending over and taking
> the the switch scam junk that they get from the ID perps instead of any
> ID science.

RonO was singing this vague, ignorant, drum beat 10 years ago. Get a
hobby or a girl.

>
> IDiocy would definitely be applicable to things like real CSI (crime
> scene investigation) instead of just talking about the bogus IDiot CSI
> (complex specified information). Archeologists would likely be using
> it, and if we were lucky enough to have it apply to biological evolution
> and genetics we could even be using it to help us select better
> agricultural plants and animals.

But if its not "legitimate" science why would it be applicable to
anything? Even Ray produces more coherent arguments.

>
> So if IDiocy was legitimate science why is it that it's only function
> today is to be used as bait for the creationist bait and switch scam
> that creationists are running on themselves? The creationists keep
> selling themselves the IDiocy, but all they ever get is the obfuscation
> switch scam with no ID science in it at all. The public switch scam
> doesn't even mention that IDiocy ever existed. The ID perps that sell
> the ID scam to the rubes even claim that the switch scam has nothing to
> do with IDiocy.

RonO doesn't have clue because he can't be bothered to do the requisite
reading. Even Ray doesn't embarrass himself like this.

Creationists (particularly YECs), by and large, don't concern themselves
with ID theory because it's unnecessary for their framework. They
explicitly presuppose God as the Creator and Designer; they have no need
to detect design. Furthermore Young Earth Creationism is concerned with
causal history (as is evolutionism and Darwinism). ID Theory has
*nothing* to do with causal history.

ID Theorists on the other hand have no interest in evolutionism or
creationism. ID theory is not a competitor of either.

So there is no scam and no bait and switch. Everything RonO claims is
pure nonsense.

>
> Why are there still IDiots like Dean and Eddie that bend over for the
> switch scam? Were there any honest creationists that actually wanted
> the ID science to make an appearance?
>
> There have been IDiots that quit the ID scam and admitted that the ID
> science never existed, but my guess is that they are still IDiots. Look
> at Mike Gene and Bill. Look at ID perp's like Behe's and Denton's IDiot
> alternatives that include biological evolution as fact.
>
> So what would things be like if there had ever been any legitimate ID
> science to discuss, and would any IDiots want to live in that reality?
>
> Ron Okimoto

Since RonO has demonstrated that he doesn't have clue about ID Theory and
may be clueless about the nature of science itself his conclusions are
pretty much valueless.

[RonO]

On 1/17/2018 5:27 PM, T Pagano wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 06:05:20 -0500, RonO wrote:

Poor Pags Dunning Kruger would be proud.

What is sad about this is that the bait and switch just went down on the
Utah IDiots and the ID perps decided to publish their best evidence for
intelligent design. If Pags reads the ID perp propaganda carefully the
ID perps take pains not to call their best evidence "scientific"
evidence. They should have put their best evidence forward years ago,
but it took them until 2013 to remove the claim that they had a
scientific theory of ID to teach in the public schools from their
Education policy. Until then they had claimed to have a scientific
theory, but 2013 was the last time before Utah that the bait and switch
went down on IDiot rubes. In 2013 the Discovery Institute had to run
the bait and switch on both Louisiana and Texas because both states
tried to put ID supplements into public school textbooks. The ID perps
ran the bait and switch on both states and removed the claim that they
had a scientific theory of ID to teach from their education policy. It
took 4 years before another group of IDiot rubes were stupid enough to
try to teach ID in the public schools in Utah.

No IDiot rube has ever gotten the ID science to teach in the history of
ID/creationism. It turns out that the ID science never existed.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/talk.origins/xCC5NGB-QHI/xmONCrEbCgAJ

Links to the IDiot evidence:
1.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-the-universe/

2.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-fine-tuning-of-the-universe/


3.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-information-in-dna/


4.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-irreducibly-complex-molecular-machines/


5.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-animals/

6.
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-humans/


The ID perps claim this as their best evidence and it all existed before
the ID scam unit of the Discovery Institute existed. Most of it failed
the scientific creationists decades before the ID scam had to take over.
Zero progress in the 22 years that the Discovery Institute has been
involved in the creationist ID scam. If you lump Behe's IC in with the
usual creationist complexity arguments they all failed decades ago
during the scientific creationists efforts of the 1960's, 70's and 80's.

IDiot specified complexity never amounted to anything. Complex
specified information never amounted to anything. The new IDiot law of
thermodynamics never amounted to anything. They don't even list their
best scientific alternative of space alien designers.

Pags should learn something from the ID scam artists, but that is likely
never going to happen.

So go over the ID perp's best evidence and determine for yourself how
well the ID science has done in the last 22 years. Zero progress should
tell you something, but it likely won't because the only IDiots left are
the ignorant, incompetent and or dishonest and Pags has been all three
for so long that it is tragically stupid.

How far back did you have to go to drag up this old thread? ID is still
the creationist scam that it was when you left TO and the bait and
switch is still going down on creationist rubes. No IDiots ever get the
promised ID science. The ID perp's best evidence tells you why.

Ron Okimoto

>
>> What if intelligent design had been legitimate science? The IDiots
>> should be thinking about that question, but IDiots don't do much
>> relevant thinking. What would things be like if IDiocy had worked out
>> and some legitimate science was ever accomplished?
>
> Notwithstanding his credentials, RonO wouldn't know legitimate science if
> he tripped over it.
>
> Considering ID isn't "legitimate" science the IDers, in 10 years, have
> made it into a household concept. It doesn't seem to want to go away.
> And its driving atheists, like RonO crazy. He can't stop writing about
> it even though he doesn't know the first thing about it.

Fooling incompetent rubes like you isn't anything to be proud of, and
that is obviously all the ID perps have accomplished.

>
>
>
>>
>> For one thing the bait and switch scam would not have been needed for
>> the last decade and a half. There would be some actual ID science to be
>> discussing instead of IDiots like Dean and Eddie bending over and taking
>> the the switch scam junk that they get from the ID perps instead of any
>> ID science.
>
>
>
>
> RonO was singing this vague, ignorant, drum beat 10 years ago. Get a
> hobby or a girl.

Reality hasn't changed. That is your problem, not mine.

>
>
>>
>> IDiocy would definitely be applicable to things like real CSI (crime
>> scene investigation) instead of just talking about the bogus IDiot CSI
>> (complex specified information). Archeologists would likely be using
>> it, and if we were lucky enough to have it apply to biological evolution
>> and genetics we could even be using it to help us select better
>> agricultural plants and animals.
>
>
> But if its not "legitimate" science why would it be applicable to
> anything? Even Ray produces more coherent arguments.

Can anyone be this incompetent and still post?

>
>
>>
>> So if IDiocy was legitimate science why is it that it's only function
>> today is to be used as bait for the creationist bait and switch scam
>> that creationists are running on themselves? The creationists keep
>> selling themselves the IDiocy, but all they ever get is the obfuscation
>> switch scam with no ID science in it at all. The public switch scam
>> doesn't even mention that IDiocy ever existed. The ID perps that sell
>> the ID scam to the rubes even claim that the switch scam has nothing to
>> do with IDiocy.
>
>
>
> RonO doesn't have clue because he can't be bothered to do the requisite
> reading. Even Ray doesn't embarrass himself like this.

Read what the ID perps claim about what is their best evidence. That is
all you should have to do, but it likely won't happen.

>
> Creationists (particularly YECs), by and large, don't concern themselves
> with ID theory because it's unnecessary for their framework. They
> explicitly presuppose God as the Creator and Designer; they have no need
> to detect design. Furthermore Young Earth Creationism is concerned with
> causal history (as is evolutionism and Darwinism). ID Theory has
> *nothing* to do with causal history.

YEC Kenyon and Nelson have been associated with the ID scam unit since
it started in 1995. The major support base for IDiocy has always been
the YEC contingent. Do you deny that? A lot of the IDiot ringleaders
are OEC, but that just means that they have been leading the YEC
contingent on for decades knowing how bogus YEC is.

>
> ID Theorists on the other hand have no interest in evolutionism or
> creationism. ID theory is not a competitor of either.
>
> So there is no scam and no bait and switch. Everything RonO claims is
> pure nonsense.

You should bone up on the ID scam at this time. These guys are now
claiming that theistic evolution is bogus even though fellows like Behe
and Denton are theistic evolutionists. It has become one of their major
hobby horses in recent times. They have started religious web sites and
haven't claimed to be a ministry at this time, but they are trying link
ID to theology. Just go to the Discovery Institute web site and look
around.

>
>
>
>>
>> Why are there still IDiots like Dean and Eddie that bend over for the
>> switch scam? Were there any honest creationists that actually wanted
>> the ID science to make an appearance?
>>
>> There have been IDiots that quit the ID scam and admitted that the ID
>> science never existed, but my guess is that they are still IDiots. Look
>> at Mike Gene and Bill. Look at ID perp's like Behe's and Denton's IDiot
>> alternatives that include biological evolution as fact.
>>
>> So what would things be like if there had ever been any legitimate ID
>> science to discuss, and would any IDiots want to live in that reality?
>>
>> Ron Okimoto
>
>
>
> Since RonO has demonstrated that he doesn't have clue about ID Theory and
> may be clueless about the nature of science itself his conclusions are
> pretty much valueless.

Everyone but you know who doesn't have a clue.

Ron Okimoto

[T Pagano]

Okimoto was fairly lucid and articulate 6 years ago.
Everything below is an indecipherable rant which makes me think stroke.

Anyone know if Okimoto is okay

[RonO]

On 1/18/2018 7:27 PM, T Pagano wrote:
> Okimoto was fairly lucid and articulate 6 years ago.
> Everything below is an indecipherable rant which makes me think stroke.
>
> Anyone know if Okimoto is okay

Just keep running it is what you are best at and doesn't make you look
as stupid and dishonest as you actually are.

Why not deal with the best that the ID perps claim to have? Running
isn't doing IDiots much good, but it is all they can think of to do.

It is supposed to be the best evidence today and was likely the best
evidence for the Scientific creationists over 30 years ago and what good
did it do them?

Ron Okimoto