Re: The current anti-evolutionist crop
- From: heekster <heekster@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:22:52 -0600
On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 01:56:32 -0800 (PST), All-seeing-I
<apc57@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 5, 12:25 am, Tim DeLaney <delaney.timo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The thread "Long time readers ... " brings to my mind how
the anti-evolution crowd here on T.O has deteriorated in
the past 15 years. Back then there were at least a dozen
or so who would seriously attempt to rebut ToE with
arguments that took genuine thought to answer.
Google's archives don't go back that far,
The google group archive for talk.origins goes gack to 9/1986.
After reading through the archive, I can safely say since around 1996
that you have learned absolutely nothing, and remain as ignorant as
ever.
it has been the evolutionist's posts that have denegerated into a seaYou misspelled "degenerated" and "inanities". Not to mention utterly
of atheistic inaccuracies and innanities.
annihilating every irony meter and bullshit detector in the northern
hemisphere, and most of those in the southern one.
You failed to identify any of the soi disant "atheistic inaccuracies
and innanities".
Fortunatly however, there does seem to be a core element ofThey must be trilobite Cambrian mammals then. You also misspelled
evolutionists that still post here and that are quite intelligent.
"Fortunately".
This core element does not include you or "your side".You haven't got a single functioning synaptic junction.
Thanks,
ASI.
and I can only
name one such poster -- "Julie", but there were others
who attempted to engage in serious debate. Many were
borderline crackpots, and some, like Ed Conrad, far over
the borderline.
The closest the current crop comes to an actual debater
is <gasp> Tony Pagano. <ducks a barrage of rotten eggs
and overripe tomatoes> But even Tony has deteriorated.
He used to be willing to make a rudimentary exchange of
ideas; nowadays he just brushes serious ideas aside and
claims victory. (Shades of Mark Harpt!)
The others are a profound disappointment. ASI, Great Dayne
and his family of nyms, Nashton, Ray, and most lately George
are all not to be taken seriously as critics. At best (or worst,
depending on your point of view), they represent nuisances
that must be dealt with. (It's a dirty job, but somebody has to
do it.)
And where were the really interesting characters like Jabriol,
Peter Nyikos, John P Boatwrong, Ted Holden, and the one
whose name shall never again be mentioned? (There are so
many more; please don't be offended if I failed to mention you!)
There were also many whose contributions I miss: PZ, Andrew
MacRae, Larry Moran, Tracy Hamilton, Richard Harter (Who has
not disappeared entirely, but can no longer be counted as a regular),
Wade Hines (Who reamed my poorer posts more than once), and
Wesley Ellsberry all come readily to mind.
Of course, there are many worthwhile posters whose continuing
contributions I value highly. I hesitate to mention any names for
fear of snubbing somebody. (As though my opinion on the matter
has more value than a bucket of warm spit.)
Alas! As briefly alluded to in one of my replies to Sapient Fridge,
there are some on "our side" whose posts I don't value. Naming
them would serve little purpose, and would only invite a flame war.
Tim
.
- References:
- The current anti-evolutionist crop
- From: Tim DeLaney
- Re: The current anti-evolutionist crop
- From: All-seeing-I
- The current anti-evolutionist crop
- Prev by Date: Re: In the News: Intelligent Design Group Sues Calif. Science Center
- Next by Date: Re: In the News: Intelligent Design Group Sues Calif. Science Center
- Previous by thread: Re: The current anti-evolutionist crop
- Next by thread: Help with google search of the Google Groups
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
