(03-28-2019, 04:23 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 04:15 PM)Brutus Buckeye Wrote: So why would up-draining nostrils be a trait that would be advantageous in passing one's seed onto the next generation, from a purely Darwinistic standpoint? Chicks Don't dig runny noses?

Please rewrite that so it makes sense. Thanks. Sinuses BTW. Not nostrils. Those are two different things even if they are near each other.

After nostrils could you rank the words in order of which ones are giving you the most to least trouble? It will speed up the revision process tremendously.

(03-28-2019, 04:39 PM)Brutus Buckeye Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 04:23 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 04:15 PM)Brutus Buckeye Wrote: So why would up-draining nostrils be a trait that would be advantageous in passing one's seed onto the next generation, from a purely Darwinistic standpoint? Chicks Don't dig runny noses?

Please rewrite that so it makes sense. Thanks. Sinuses BTW. Not nostrils. Those are two different things even if they are near each other.

After nostrils could you rank the words in order of which ones are giving you the most to least trouble? It will speed up the revision process tremendously.

Sorry it isn't individual words and I have no idea what the sentence is supposed to mean. So if you don't have a coherent thought then OK.

Good talk

(03-28-2019, 04:23 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 04:15 PM)Brutus Buckeye Wrote: So why would up-draining nostrils be a trait that would be advantageous in passing one's seed onto the next generation, from a purely Darwinistic standpoint? Chicks Don't dig runny noses?

Please rewrite that so it makes sense. Thanks. Sinuses BTW. Not nostrils. Those are two different things even if they are near each other.

This reminds me of the time cincy was explaining chemicals and particulate matter.

Here's a plethora of videos on YouTube with Dr. Michael Strauss, a PHD astrophysicist at some no-name school, the University of Oklahoma, I think  He believes in "intelligent design" and discusses the concept on the videos in the link.  

Third here in 3...2...1... to tell us that being an astrophysicist at a *****-school like OU doesn't count.  

Just messing with you third on the "***** school".  I couldn't help myself.  

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...ent+design

(03-28-2019, 05:55 PM)K9Buck Wrote: Here's a plethora of videos on YouTube with Dr. Michael Strauss, a PHD astrophysicist at some no-name school, the University of Oklahoma, I think  He believes in "intelligent design" and discusses the concept on the videos in the link.  

Third here in 3...2...1... to tell us that being an astrophysicist at a *****-school like OU doesn't count.  

Just messing with you third on the "***** school".  I couldn't help myself.  

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...ent+design

So he's religious and believes that stuff. He has no credentials in any field related to evolution. The Ph.D. is irrelevant then no matter the school.

(03-28-2019, 05:57 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 05:55 PM)K9Buck Wrote: Here's a plethora of videos on YouTube with Dr. Michael Strauss, a PHD astrophysicist at some no-name school, the University of Oklahoma, I think  He believes in "intelligent design" and discusses the concept on the videos in the link.  

Third here in 3...2...1... to tell us that being an astrophysicist at a *****-school like OU doesn't count.  

Just messing with you third on the "***** school".  I couldn't help myself.  

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...ent+design

So he's religious and believes that stuff. He has no credentials in any field related to evolution. The Ph.D. is irrelevant then no matter the school.

He has a PHD in astrophysics and discusses the evidence of intelligent design in the cosmos.  Feel free to listen and then argue the science.  You won't, because you cannot accept the possibility that a higher power created the universe and us.  I think you'd go along with ANY theory, as long as it doesn't mention "God", hence the remark that you are a "Anything but God" adherent.

(03-28-2019, 06:04 PM)K9Buck Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 05:57 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 05:55 PM)K9Buck Wrote: Here's a plethora of videos on YouTube with Dr. Michael Strauss, a PHD astrophysicist at some no-name school, the University of Oklahoma, I think  He believes in "intelligent design" and discusses the concept on the videos in the link.  

Third here in 3...2...1... to tell us that being an astrophysicist at a *****-school like OU doesn't count.  

Just messing with you third on the "***** school".  I couldn't help myself.  

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...ent+design

So he's religious and believes that stuff. He has no credentials in any field related to evolution. The Ph.D. is irrelevant then no matter the school.

He has a PHD in astrophysics and discusses the evidence of intelligent design in the cosmos.  Feel free to listen and then argue the science.  You won't, because you cannot accept the possibility that a higher power created the universe and us.  I think you'd go along with ANY theory, as long as it doesn't mention "God", hence the remark that you are a "Anything but God" adherent.

Don't really know much about astrophysics but the creation of the universe strikes me as a far different subject than evolution or "Intelligent Design" pseudoscience. There is no science that can show anything supernatural. That exists outside science. So there's no science to argue. It's just his opinion.

(03-28-2019, 03:52 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:47 PM)zigbee Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:36 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:35 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 02:53 PM)K9Buck Wrote: Third, can you provide an example of a Meyer scientific statement that is false?

No. He's never made any scientific statements.

So, you've watched this video to completion or other ones that he's done?

I hope 3rd Gen is NOT SAYING people with degrees in history are uneducated.

I'm saying they aren't scientists. This guy is a hot mess. Dishonest like nearly all creationists and incredibly ignorant of his subject matter in which he has zero training. His books are critiqued by people who are actually trained and working in the fields he discusses and they delineate how dishonest and just flat wrong they are. I linked one above. 
This is pseudoscience and this guy is an ignorant clown you should ignore.

I knew this.   Was pulling your leg good friend.

(03-28-2019, 03:52 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:47 PM)zigbee Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:36 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:35 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 02:53 PM)K9Buck Wrote: Third, can you provide an example of a Meyer scientific statement that is false?

No. He's never made any scientific statements.

So, you've watched this video to completion or other ones that he's done?

I hope 3rd Gen is NOT SAYING people with degrees in history are uneducated.

I'm saying they aren't scientists. This guy is a hot mess. Dishonest like nearly all creationists and incredibly ignorant of his subject matter in which he has zero training. His books are critiqued by people who are actually trained and working in the fields he discusses and they delineate how dishonest and just flat wrong they are. I linked one above. 
This is pseudoscience and this guy is an ignorant clown you should ignore.

History ???   He has degrees in geology among others.  His degrees are in science.  Watch the opening and he'll give you hos credentials.   History?  Huh?

Also he says these discussions are going on throughout the scientific community.  

Saying this ***** is settled is like saying mmgw is settled.  It isn't settled at all.  

Anyway, great interview.  Shapiro asks great questions.

Double major in Physics and Geology.  Worked as a Geophysicist 5 years in industry.  Did a program in the Philosophy of Science, specifically Biology at Cambridge University.  Phd dissertation on the Origin of Life problem (interdisciplinary Phd).   Not a single mention of being a History major.  Implies his Wiki page is a hoot where he's called a Creationist.  Says difference is ID is derived from data from the natural world, where Creationism is from scripture (obviously).  This information is all within about the first 3 min of the video.

(03-28-2019, 09:55 PM)ScarletHayes Wrote: Double major in Physics and Geology.  Worked as a Geophysicist 5 years in industry.  Did a program in the Philosophy of Science, specifically Biology at Cambridge University.  Phd dissertation on the Origin of Life problem (interdisciplinary Phd).   Not a single mention of being a History major.  Implies his Wiki page is a hoot where he's called a Creationist.  Says difference is ID is derived from data from the natural world, where Creationism is from scripture (obviously).  This information is all within about the first 3 min of the video.

Thatâ€s not enough. He doesnâ€t toe the line of the accepted worldview.

(03-28-2019, 07:45 PM)ScarletHayes Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:52 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:47 PM)zigbee Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:36 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote:

(03-28-2019, 03:35 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote: No. He's never made any scientific statements.

So, you've watched this video to completion or other ones that he's done?

I hope 3rd Gen is NOT SAYING people with degrees in history are uneducated.

I'm saying they aren't scientists. This guy is a hot mess. Dishonest like nearly all creationists and incredibly ignorant of his subject matter in which he has zero training. His books are critiqued by people who are actually trained and working in the fields he discusses and they delineate how dishonest and just flat wrong they are. I linked one above. 
This is pseudoscience and this guy is an ignorant clown you should ignore.

History ???   He has degrees in geology among others.  His degrees are in science.  Watch the opening and he'll give you hos credentials.   History?  Huh?

His PhD is in the the history of science. He has no training whatsoever in the fields heâ€s talking about. That and his dishonesty is why he makes such a fool of himself. I have far more science training/ education than he does and the idea of doing what he does writing idiotically about subjects heâ€s ignorant of would be a ridiculous thing for me to do. Heâ€s a clown.