On 11/21/2022 1:47 PM,
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 9:35:18 AM UTC-5, Ron O wrote:
>> On 11/19/2022 6:50 AM,
broger...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 11:45:14 PM UTC-5, Ron O wrote:
>
>>>> The Top Six still has the effect that it has on IDiots.
>
> Speculation, and false where I am concerned. What is certain is that it still has a completely
> obsolete effect on YOU.
This is all just more to lie about. Think about bearing false witness.
When have you ever dealt with the Top Six in an honest and
straightforward manner? You never have. You aren't any better than any
of the other IDiots that were posting at the time that the ID perps put
out their Top Six. You have farted around a lot, missing the point and
still managing to run from them at the same time. Really, what have you
done with the Top Six since they were given to you by the ID perps. You
know that they were just the same god-of-the-gaps denial that the
scientific creationists failed with, and what have you done? Fit them
into your space alien scenario and figure out why all the other IDiots
have to run from them or claim that they never supported the ID scam
like Bill did.
>
>
>>>> Glenn is still running from them. Kalk still quit being an IDiot due to the
>>>> Top Six. For a couple months Kalk tried to wallow in second rate ID
>>>> perp denial like Glenn,
>
> Denial of WHAT? of your delusions about why their responses to
> you do not meet your demands?
What does Glenn still put up from the ID perps? It is never any
positive evidence for IDiocy it is always gap denial stupidity about
claims that we don't know everything, or that science hasn't accounted
for the gap that they are putting forward. What did Glenn put up by
mistake? He didn't know that he was putting up the Top Six stupid gap
denial because he doesn't want to understand the second rate gap denial
that he gets from the ID perps anymore than he wants to understand the
Top Six.
Just try to get him to tell you why he was stupid enough to put up so
many of the Top Six when he has been running from them for the last 5
years. He has put up one of the Top Six from time to time in the last 5
years, but he has always run from doing it when it is pointed out just
what he has done. In the last case I just wanted to know how willfully
ignorant Glenn could be and he kept putting up the Top Six that the ID
perps were feeding him one at a time at his favorite creationist science
denial site.
>
> I told Bill Rogers just now that your demands are stupid:
>
> "This is the first time I've seen an ID opponent acknowledge
> that ID theory does not necessarily call for a single designer.
>
> "This is the opposite of the ranting Ron O does above -- and has done
> for several years -- about what he fondly imagines Glenn to be running away from."
>
https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/wLSRK67XcYs/m/XCqjIiRPAwAJ
You need to deal with your stupid comments to me. Why should I care
what you lie to Bill Rogers about? Do you recall that it was your
response to Bill Rogers in the dirty debating thread that you wanted me
to deal with, and it turned out that you were just lying to him?
Remember you shouldn't start lying about the dirty debating thread or
the second holy water repost will be reposted.
>
>
>
>>>> but it was too stupid and dishonest to keep
>>>> doing that when he couldn't deal with the best that the ID perps had to
>>>> give him.
>
> "couldn't deal with" = didn't deal with it the way I, RonO, wanted him to do it
>
> Kalk isn't even a Christian AFAIK. In his latest replies to me he seems to be more
> in tune with the Vedas than with the Bible:
You have to ask Kalk. Kalk has claimed that he never claimed to be
hindu, and that he is not hindu. His use of the vedas was just his
weird attempt to act like an outside observer of the ID creationist scam.
>
>
https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/e31xp8nnUEc/m/D4PmDr0xAgAJ
> Re: God reveals himself through what he has made says Pope's astronomer
> Nov 17, 2022, 10:15:16 PM
>
> What makes you think the pantheon of Vedic gods had to assign ONE of them
> to do the work to take care of what YOU call the Top Six?
> just to conform to YOUR interpretation of what the Bible says?
You need to take it up with Kalk. He has already confessed to have been
a plain biblical creationist IDiot after he quit supporting the ID scam.
>
>
> <snip to where you disregarded this connection about Kalkidas>
>
>
>>>> The god that fills the
>>>> existing origin of life gap isn't Biblical enough for most anti
>>>> evolution creationists. The plain and simple fact is that IDiots and ex
>>>> IDiots like Glenn, Kalk, Pagano, and Bill don't want to believe in the
>>>> designer that fills the Top Six gaps. That designer isn't Biblical
>>>> enough.
>
> <snip to get to Bill Rogers's words and your replies to them>
>
>
>
>>> I find it pretty hard to read your posts. The constant formulaic insults and even more so the consistent tone of contempt are just too depressing. But....underneath it you have a reasonable argument that's important.
>
> I disputed this in my reply to Rogers, linked above.
Go for it dispute now. There seemed have only been the claim with
nothing to back it up.
>
>> Well, Nyikos understands it enough to run. That is all it was meant to
>> do.
>
> In this way, you idiotically count your chickens before they are hatched.
> And in a hypocritical way at that: you haven't TOUCHED my first reply
> to your OP, done nine (9) days ago.
You are still running from it. Why lie about something as stupid as
that. You have removed it from this post just so that you could lie
about it.
>
> By the time the nine days since your first reply to me has elapsed,
> it'll be Thanksgiving day, and I will have replied to it,
> giving you one less thing to be thankful for on that day.
Glenn will remember the tomorrow that never came. Why would it take you
that long to respond to a post when you are obviously responding to
others in this tread on the topic, and even their responses to my
response that you are running from?
There isn't going to be a response because you already know that you
were wrong about what you wrote. Your nitpicks were about things that
were not true. I was exactly correct about the issues you claimed that
I was wrong about. You were wrong about those things or you were
deliberately lying about them. You likely have already checked out the
video and you know that you were wrong about Sewell and the Top Six, and
it was Miller that removed the Big Bang to make it the Top 5. There is
nothing that you can do except admit that you were wrong.
>
>
>> My guess is that formulaic insults are just facts that make the
>> IDiots look bad. The "insults" are true. If you disagree, you could
>> try to demonstrate otherwise.
>
> I've already done that to some of them above, and there's
> more below. You are wallowing in delusion.
I haven't seen you do any such thing. You've just claimed to do
something to Rogers, and made claims about Kalk that are false. Really,
Kalk has claimed that he never claimed to be hindu. He is just your
usual biblical creationist exIDiot.
>
>
> >They are just what the situation is at
>> this time. If you think that the term IDiot is an insult, it is likely
>> a badge of honor for the IDiots that are left.
>
> You are trying to transfer a scam Paul Gans initiated in 1995
> (and which several people including your staunch ally Hemidactylus, have adopted)
> to us, who are far too honest to indulge in such scamming.
>
> The scam was to never, *never*, NEVER try to disprove accusations
> of dishonesty, cowardice, unfairness, hypocrisy etc. that were made by us,
> unless evidence is provided on the spot (and even THEN sometimes)
> but to treat it as "a badge of honor." This scam is the longest
> run of the despicable tactic of gaslighting that I have ever encountered.
The scam in this case is what the ID perps run on their own creationist
support base. You know for a fact that since 2002 the ID perps have run
the bait and switch scam on every IDiot creationist rube that has needed
the ID science. They have only used ID as the bait to run in their
obfuscation and denial switch scam. It has happened 100% of the time.
There have been no exceptions. You have witnessed multiple examples
since returning to TO at the end of 2010. You know that even after
Dover the ID perps continued to claim that they had the ID science to
teach in the public schools, but what happens every single time a
creationist rube needs the ID science to teach? The ID perps updated
that teach ID scam propaganda in 2021. They haven't quit running the
bait and switch. What will happen to the next group of creationist
rubes that want to teach the science of ID in their public schools if
there are any IDiot creationists left that are stupid, ignorant and
dishonest enough to try?
This lame type if denial of what has been going on for 20 years is lame
and stupid.
>
>
>> They are much worse off
>> than idiots at this time. The only IDiots left have been the igorant,
>> incompetent, and or dishonest since the bait and switch started to go
>> down over 20 years ago,
>
> You are still clinging to the idiotic claim that there was one as late as ten years
> ago, thanks to your idiotic delusion that you showed "bait" still
> active then when all you could put up was tons of what
> would have been "switch" if there had been bait to switch from.
The last bait and switch was on the Utah IDiotic creationists who wanted
to teach the science of ID in their public schools, but what did they
get from the ID perps. It is sad that they were running the bait and
switch on the Utah rubes at the same time that they were posting their
Top Six 5 years ago. That is the last time any group of creationist
rubes have been stupid enough to try to teach the junk. 5 years have
been the longest such stretch between bait and switch efforts. There
just aren't very many rubes stupid and ignorant enough to believe the ID
perps anymore. What is even sadder is that right on evolutionnews, just
a month or two later, the ID perps denigrated the Utah decision to drop
the issue instead of bend over for their switch scam. The ID perps were
really ticked off that the IDiot rubes would not take the switch scam
after failing to get any ID science out of the ID perps.
>
>> Nyikos and Glenn are obviously all three of
>> what is required.
>
> You are bearing false witness against both of us, especially me.
> Do you even care about Jesus's words, "Do not bear false witness"
> any more? did you ever care about them?
You have consistently demonstrated that you are all three. Who was just
ignorant or lying about Sewell, Miller and the Top Six. Who has lied
about the ID scam since your return to TO? You were wrong about the ID
perp's involvement with the Ohio bait and switch, and you have been
wrong about the ID scam ever since because you can't seem to admit that
you were wrong. Bearing false witness is a way of life for you in terms
of the ID scam for the simple reason that there is no rational excuse
for lying about what you have been lying about all this time.
>
>
>>> The ID folks claim that their scientific claims are agnostic about the characteristics and identity of the designer. But that's nonsense. Each one of the natural phenomena they claim naturalistic science can never account for puts constraints on the characteristics of the designer, and any reasonable ID scientist, if they were really doing science, would try to use all those constraints to make a preliminary model of the characteristics of the designer.
>
> At this point, Rogers was still working under the assumption
> that had to be only ONE designer responsible for ID.
> At one point (snipped below, to be dealt with in a subsequent reply later today)
Unfortunately even you knew that Sewell and Miller were talking about
the one biblical god. That was part of your incorrect argument, so why
blame Rogers for understand the same thing?
>
>
>> The ID perps have lied about ID for decades. That is enough said about
>> that. Just look at Nyikos' response above. He claims that Miller and
>> Sewell were just supporting their belief in their god and their Top Six
>> and Top 5 wasn't about ID, but the articles were standard IDiocy in that
>> they never mentioned who or what designer they were talking about. It
>> has all been part of the creationist scam.
>
> I'll have to review that video. My comment may have been a faulty
> recollection based on what their arguments were best at supporting.
What a lame loser. You made your false nitpicking claims and you hadn't
bothered to know what was actually in the video? I just assumed that
you were lying as usual, but it looks like you were just willfully
ignorant, and that is just another form of dishonesty.
>
> To wit: The choice of the Sewell's Top Five was much
> more effective as an argument for the existence of God than for
> the theory of Intelligent design, whereas the two that
> Sewell completely ignored (IC and the Cambrian explosion)
> work much better for ID theory than as arguments for the existence of God.
Sewell may well have been using his Top Six to lie to himself about
support for his god, but he was just using them as disembodied god of
the gaps denial as the usual intelligent design propaganda. Sewell and
Miller put up their written articles as intelligent design articles, and
the video is titled "Evidence for intelligent design." They were not
put up in one of the ID perp's religious topics or on one of the
religious web sites that they started up after their loss in Dover.
>
> And I stand by one comment: although Sewell made brief comments
> about the Big Bang (#2 of the original so-called "Top Six"), he did
> not put it on the list of 5 that is written in big letters in the video. It is this
> written list which Miller transcribed in his text that accompanied
> the video.
>
>
> CONTINUED in next reply to this post after some replies to others.
The Big Bang was #1 of the ID perp's Top Six. Fine tuning was #2
because the first part likely occurred during the Big Bang and the
second part occurred billions of years later when the solar system
formed out of dead star stuff. Sewell is the one that dropped out IC
and the Cambrian explosion, chopped up fine tuning and human evolution
into two parts to maintain the Top Six and put them all out of temporal
order so that he could better lie to himself about the evidence as
disembodied bits of denial.
You are wrong again. Go to around 9 min and 35 seconds into the video
and you will see #6 get listed and it is the Big Bang, the beginning of
time. It is even give the #6 designation.
Why continue when you have done so poorly already. Shouldn't you spend
your time actually responding to the post that you are running from?
You would have to start by admitting how wrong you were, and still are.
Ron Okimoto