The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial

[Bob Duncan]

The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial

Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's Kitzmiller
decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a
serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>

--
God exists, and is transcendent to space and time.
.

[Mitchell Holman]

Bob Duncan <bob7d...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:f3dd6f1f-fa8c-4351...@googlegroups.com:

>
> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
>
> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
> evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of
> intelligent design.
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
>

Oh, think I see your problem.

There is no such thing as the

"scientific theory of intelligent
design".

Glad to have helped out.

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsB019D11264759...@69.80.101.53...

> Bob Duncan wrote:
>>
>> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
>>
>> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
>> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
>> evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of
>> intelligent design.
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
>
>
> Oh, think I see your problem.
>
> There is no such thing as the
> "scientific theory of intelligent
> design".

It has to do with ~ Creation ~.

Can you explain bio-molecular machines and factories
that are found in living things, apart from an Intelligent
causation?

No? OK.

> Glad to have helped out.

Yes, glad to help you out!

Consider ATP Synthase: It is the power plant of the cell

It is actually a bio-molecular machine that functions as a
miniature power-generator. It has many parts that we use
in human designed technology; including a rotor, a stator,
a camshaft or driveshaft, and other basic components of
a rotary engine.

Intelligently designed? Yes.

If you want "evidence"... it's in > all living things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8m6o0gXDY

[Bob Duncan]

Bob Duncan wrote:

Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial

Scholars and attorneys at Discovery Institute show how Judge Jones's

Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence,
and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo

--

My God exists, and is transcendent to space and time.
.

[The Certified Castrator Of Jews Every Jew All Jews]

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 9:34:38 PM UTC-4, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Bob Duncan <bob7d...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:f3dd6f1f-fa8c-4351...@googlegroups.com:
> >
> > The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
> >
> > Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
> > Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
> > evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of
> > intelligent design.
> >
> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
> >
> Oh, think I see your problem.

DO YOU HAVE EYES?

[JWS]

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 7:11:17 PM UTC-5, Bob Duncan wrote:
> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
>
> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's Kitzmiller
> decision was based upon faulty reasoning,

faulty reasoning by the defense.

> non-existent evidence,
defense had no evidence.

> and a
> serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

ROFLMAO>

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
It's really sad to this this BS just go on and on.

[Bob Duncan]

On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 3:00:32 PM UTC-4, Bob Duncan wrote:
> Bob Duncan wrote:
>
> Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
> Scholars and attorneys at Discovery Institute show how Judge Jones's
> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence,
> and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo

The critics have to lie.
And we know they're lying.
Because they have nothing
to prove it's not a lie.
Simple logic.

--

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote in
news:fJpfM.6782842$miq3.6...@fx02.ams4:

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> news:XnsB019D11264759...@69.80.101.53...
>> Bob Duncan wrote:
>>>
>>> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
>>>
>>> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
>>> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
>>> evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory
>>> of intelligent design.
>>>
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
>>
>>
>> Oh, think I see your problem.
>>
>> There is no such thing as the
>> "scientific theory of intelligent
>> design".
>
> It has to do with ~ Creation ~.
>

What is scientific about that?

> Can you explain bio-molecular machines and factories
> that are found in living things, apart from an Intelligent
> causation?

Just tell us why there is NO
science behind ID. No research,
no studies, no college courses.

[%]

you didn't answer him

[El Kabong]

Bob Duncan wrote:

> The critics have to lie.
> And we know they're lying.
> Because they have nothing
> to prove it's not a lie.
> Simple logic.

Does that actually make some kind of sense to you?

[Jack Sovalot]

On Mon, 05 Jun 2023 20:02:15 -0700, El Kabong <tw...@the.noodle>
wrote:

Duncan is incapable of rational thought.

[%]

you stupid asshole

[Bob Duncan]

On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 10:02:34 PM UTC-4, Mitchell Holman wrote:

> Just tell us why there is NO science behind ID. No research,
> no studies, no college courses.

That's "Hollowman's" unsubstantiated assertion.

He's the one who must provide the evidence and the proof
that he's not lying.

The liar has been caught in one of his lies.
<smirk>

[Georg Tillerman]

On 6/5/23 10:02 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> "Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote

>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message

>>> Bob Duncan wrote:

>>>> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial

>>>> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
>>>> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
>>>> evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory
>>>> of intelligent design.

>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>

>>> Oh, think I see your problem.

>>> There is no such thing as the
>>> "scientific theory of intelligent
>>> design".

>> It has to do with ~ Creation ~.

> What is scientific about that?

>> Can you explain bio-molecular machines and factories
>> that are found in living things, apart from an Intelligent
>> causation?

> Just tell us why there is NO
> science behind ID. No research,
> no studies, no college courses.

it's the same data.

some people look at the data and say; "engineering"

some people look at the data and say; "random happenstance"

the data itself does not tell you how to interpret it.

[Andrew]

"Georg Tillerman" wrote in message news:u5n1o3$n3uc$1...@dont-email.me...
> Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> "Andrew" wrote

>>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>>>> Bob Duncan wrote:
>
>>>>> The Truth about the Dover Intelligent Design Trial
>
>>>>> Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's
>>>>> Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent
>>>>> evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory
>>>>> of intelligent design.
>
>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYcpzZF7LVo>
>
>>>> Oh, think I see your problem.
>
>>>> There is no such thing as the
>>>> "scientific theory of intelligent
>>>> design".
>
>>> It has to do with ~ Creation ~.
>
>> What is scientific about that?
>
>>> Can you explain bio-molecular machines and factories
>>> that are found in living things, apart from an Intelligent
>>> causation?
>
>> Just tell us why there is NO
>> science behind ID. No research,
>> no studies, no college courses.
>
> it's the same data.
>
> some people look at the data and say; "engineering"
>
> some people look at the data and say; "random happenstance"
>
> the data itself does not tell you how to interpret it.

The ''data'' is self-evident except for those who cling
to a philosophical bias that would prevent them from
acknowledging the obvious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8m6o0gXDY

[Mitchell Holman]

Bob Duncan <bob7d...@gmail.com> wrote in news:810bb27e-c488-4c2b-bd1b-
56ed5e...@googlegroups.com:

> On Monday, June 5, 2023 at 10:02:34 PM UTC-4, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> Just tell us why there is NO science behind ID. No research,
>> no studies, no college courses.
>
>
> That's "Hollowman's" unsubstantiated assertion.
>

Oh, the irony.



"Everyone has at least one religious belief."
Robert Duncan aka "Bob", unproven assertion,
Dec 28 2019
https://tinyurl.com/uwh5jfo

> He's the one who must provide the evidence and the proof
> that he's not lying.

But you don't have to provide proof of YOUR
claims? Typical.

[Skeeter]

In article <nuKdnUgXfv03COP5...@giganews.com>, pursent100
@gmail.com says...

he never does

[%]

holman's nobody anyway

[%]

>https://www.google.com/search?q=Dave+Keeting,+assworm&filter=0&biw=1360&bih=625&dpr=1 YAY

[Georg Tillerman]

On 6/6/23 8:57 AM, Andrew wrote:
> "Georg Tillerman" wrote

https://pdb101.rcsb.org/motm/72


I don't think anyone denies that ATPSynthase is a molecular Motor.

[Skeeter]

In article <SG2dnbpumvkJp-L5...@giganews.com>, pursent100
@gmail.com says...

He spends his days archiving usenet and yelling "prove it"

[Mitchell Holman]

Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
news:MPG.3ee8fb0be...@usnews.blocknews.net:

Et tu, Brute?




"If it's true then you should be able to prove it"
"Skeeter", Dec 24, 2022
https://tinyurl.com/426j8rhb

[Skeeter]

In article <XnsB01B820D7497E...@69.80.102.48>,
noe...@verizon.net says...

I don't keep shit like that above like you do obsesso. When I close my
reader you no longer exist.

[Andrew]

"Georg Tillerman" wrote in message news:u5neq8$oh5l$1...@dont-email.me...

And from your reference, there are 'other'
bio-molecular motors necessary for life.

Which begs the question. Can their origin be
explained by Darwinian processes, or is ID
more logical?

"We must concede that there are presently no
detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution
of any biochemical or cellular system, only a
variety of wishful speculations."
~ Harold, Franklin M.
prof. biochemistry

[JWS]

https://biologydirect.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1745-6150-4-11

[Georg Tillerman]

Andrew wrote:
> "Georg Tillerman" wrote.

well, there's a difference between explaining and verifying
and we have no specimen of any original living organisms
with and without ATPSynthase, so, we cannot watch ATPSynthase
develop in an organism where it wasn't present, and we also
cannot design a physical experiment to mimic this unknown process,
inasmuch as it _is_ said to develop by accidental rewrites and
no specific mechanistic description can be offered.

so, to say that ATPSynthase arose by gradual, random rewrites
of existing genetic materials in some primordial organism
is what one may refer to as "non-falsifiable"

that makes gradual random mutation a crummy theory,

but, we cannot go back and watch any intelligent designer manufacture
living creatures either, we seem to be stuck in the middle here.



so, the problem does fall to this again;

/////

some people look at the data and say; "engineering"

some people look at the data and say; "random happenstance"

/////



one problem is, that, before there are any living creatures
the only natural forces present are like, gravity and electromagnetism
and these living creatures NOW use DNA as coded instruction sets
to replicate themselves, and so, one would have to insist that gravity
and electromagnetism alone behaved like a coded set of instructions,
that gravity and electromagnetism behaved -as- a living cell behaves,
to bring about the first living organism whereupon, this unknowable
mechanism simply disappears into the shadows and all new life arises
from these newly formed coded instruction sets.

and, sad to say, gravity and electromagnetism do not,
together, constitute a life replicating mechanism,
nor a coded set of instructions.


something has to put the original pieces in place properly

and some people suggest that THIS, IS an evidence

of conscious interference in the material world

by some unseen hand.

The fact that coded instruction sets appear

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin.

i don't see a problem in allowing school children to hear things like this.


didn't mean to run on, but it's hard to keep it short.

[Mitchell Holman]

Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in news:MPG.3ee93e881173532198d5b3
@usnews.blocknews.net:

You demand proof even as you criticize
others for demanding proof.

Double standards much?

[Andrew]

"JWS" wrote in message news:d20e7f86-d312-47d9...@googlegroups.com...

From your source,

"Conceivably, a variety of non-trivial evolutionary
connections between eukaryotic proteins and their
prokaryotic ancestors remain to be discovered,
leading to unusual evolutionary scenarios."- ibid.

And we must concede that in the realm of fantasy
anything can happen, depending on ones power to
fantasize.

yes.

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote in
news:XDSfM.7219686$SIb3.1...@fx05.ams4:

Modern Christian: Someone who believes
in dragons, unicorns, talking snakes and
transmutation (all mentioned in the Bible)
but accuses others of indulging in fantasies.

[Andrew]

"Georg Tillerman" wrote in message news:u5ogcn$sje0$1...@dont-email.me...

One should ask as to the origin of this, "existing genetic material".
Because instructions in code format may originate -only- from an
intelligent source that had a plan for originating it.

> is what one may refer to as "non-falsifiable"
>
> that makes gradual random mutation a crummy theory,
>
> but, we cannot go back and watch any intelligent designer manufacture
> living creatures either, we seem to be stuck in the middle here.
>
> so, the problem does fall to this again;
>
> /////
> some people look at the data and say; "engineering"
>
> some people look at the data and say; "random happenstance"
> /////
>
> one problem is, that, before there are any living creatures
> the only natural forces present are like, gravity and electromagnetism
> and these living creatures NOW use DNA as coded instruction sets
> to replicate themselves, and so, one would have to insist that gravity
> and electromagnetism alone behaved like a coded set of instructions,
> that gravity and electromagnetism behaved -as- a living cell behaves,
> to bring about the first living organism whereupon, this unknowable
> mechanism simply disappears into the shadows and all new life arises
> from these newly formed coded instruction sets.
>
> and, sad to say, gravity and electromagnetism do not,
> together, constitute a life replicating mechanism,
> nor a coded set of instructions.

"Sad" for those who refuse to accept the alternative.

> something has to put the original pieces in place properly
>
> and some people suggest that THIS, IS an evidence
>
> of conscious interference in the material world
>
> by some unseen hand.
>
> The fact that coded instruction sets appear
>
> Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin.
>
> i don't see a problem in allowing school children to hear things like this.

Apparently some do.

[Georg Tillerman]

Andrew wrote:
> "Georg Tillerman" wrote...

if a signal, that seemed to come from 8 light years away, was detected
on a radio telescope,
and that signal was a mouse's DNA code, would computers consider that
signal to have come
from 'intelligent life' or viewed as "noise" ?

you could test this.

transmit a radio signal of a mouse's DNA code and
see if a radio telescope detects it as message.

that would be like;

"computers programmed to detect 'intelligent life other planets'
have detected intelligent life in DNA's own messaging."

pity

[JWS]

Yes. That's called honesty. There remains a lot of
work to do. But the question was:

"Can their origin be explained by Darwinian processes,
or is ID more logical?"

What do you have that approaches this paper?
What does ID demonstrate that could not possibly
have happened and why? Can you demonstrate
that the polymerases formed in the experiment
could not have happened in nature? Show you
work.

> And we must concede that in the realm of fantasy
> anything can happen, depending on ones power to
> fantasize.
>
> yes.

Science is not fantasy, but magic men in the sky
are fantasies.

[Skeeter]

In article <XnsB01C52C2CF45F...@69.80.102.55>,
noe...@verizon.net says...

So you have met every "modern christian"?


Or are you just trying to be silly?

[Skeeter]

In article <XnsB01BD03E1B1B1...@69.80.101.49>,

Which has what to do with what I said? You actually have a file full of
this shit.

[Mitchell Holman]

"Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote in
news:kD0gM.5409762$odm4.4...@fx14.ams4:

All of the bases in DNA and RNA have
now been found in meteorites
APRIL 26, 2022

More of the ingredients for life have
been found in meteorites.

Space rocks that fell to Earth within
the last century contain the five bases
that store information in DNA and RNA,
scientists report April 26 in Nature
Communications.

These nucleobases — adenine, guanine,
cytosine, thymine and uracil — combine
with sugars and phosphates to make up
the genetic code of all life on Earth.
Whether these basic ingredients for
life first came from space or instead
formed in a warm soup of earthly
chemistry is still not known. But the
discovery adds to evidence that suggests
life’s precursors originally came from
space, the researchers say.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/all-of-the-bases-in-dna-and-rna-have-
now-been-found-in-meteorites

>
>> is what one may refer to as "non-falsifiable"
>>
>> that makes gradual random mutation a crummy theory,
>>
>> but, we cannot go back and watch any intelligent designer manufacture
>> living creatures either, we seem to be stuck in the middle here.
>>
>> so, the problem does fall to this again;
>>
>> /////
>> some people look at the data and say; "engineering"
>>
>> some people look at the data and say; "random happenstance"
>> /////
>>
>> one problem is, that, before there are any living creatures
>> the only natural forces present are like, gravity and
>> electromagnetism and these living creatures NOW use DNA as coded
>> instruction sets to replicate themselves, and so, one would have to
>> insist that gravity and electromagnetism alone behaved like a coded
>> set of instructions, that gravity and electromagnetism behaved -as- a
>> living cell behaves, to bring about the first living organism
>> whereupon, this unknowable mechanism simply disappears into the
>> shadows and all new life arises from these newly formed coded
>> instruction sets.
>>
>> and, sad to say, gravity and electromagnetism do not,
>> together, constitute a life replicating mechanism,
>> nor a coded set of instructions.
>
> "Sad" for those who refuse to accept the alternative.
>

Show us a PROVEN alternative.

[Andrew]

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsB01C8621356A3...@69.80.101.58...
> "Andrew" wrote:

Does that tell us where the "information"
itself comes from?

No it does not. So tell us, why you failed
to think of that? Since it is the most vital
component of DNA, and of all life!

> These nucleobases - adenine, guanine,
> cytosine, thymine and uracil - combine

> with sugars and phosphates to make up
> the genetic code of all life on Earth.

They 'combine' (as they say), the same way
letters and numbers combine to make up a
technical book having instructions in code
format.

This can happen -only- from the active and
direct involvement of an intelligent agency.

[JWS]

The "information" is the triple nucleotide
sequence formed by the covalent bonds
at the '3 and '5 carbons of the phosphate.
What else do you think is there?

[Andrew]

"JWS" wrote in message news:d6807285-7bcc-4bd7...@googlegroups.com...
>Andrew wrote:

You are talking about the physical medium
that carries tthe information. The physical
medium itself is nat the information.

Like a sheet of music that has words and
music notes. The paper and words are not
the music itself.

In other words, information is immaterial
to the physical medium that carries it.

[JWS]

Yes, it is.

> Like a sheet of music that has words and
> music notes. The paper and words are not
> the music itself.

It may be a fair analogy that nucleotide triplets
compare to notes on paper. But the "music"
is the RNA polymerase "reading" a triplet and
selecting an amino acid to attach to the
protein chain. The "music" is then over for that
"note".

> In other words, information is immaterial
> to the physical medium that carries it.

The information strictly conforms to the physical
triplets that are encountered by the physical RNA
polymerase.
If not, what is happening here?