Saturday, April 9, 2011
Friday, April 8, 2011
I have been a bit busy and haven't been making any long posts, but I can't let this go without comment. PZ Myers mentioned on both Panda's Thumb and Pharyngula that it's "Paul Nelson Day". Seven years ago Paul Nelson, ID proponent and fellow over at the Disreputable Institute promised an explanation of his idea of "ontogenetic depth" which is supposed to measure the complexity of developmental processes and somehow would make evolution is impossible. He came up with this gem in March of 2004 and promised to have an explanation of what it is and how to calculate it 'tomorrow'. He said this on April 7, so today is the anniversary of another year passing with conspicuous silence from Paul Nelson.
Now this time last year, Nelson himself tried to make fun of PZ Myers and failed miserably. he also failed to explain his pet concept (again). What I also found funny is he said he developed this concept in 2003. Myers says it was in 2004. Personally I believe Myers, but either way, Happy Paul Nelson Day.
As I was writing this, I also wandered over to James Lynch's 'A Simple Prop' and saw that he was also celebrating the day, only he had something new -- not enlightening, just new. Apparently Paul nelson has finally gotten around STARTING to provide an explanation. In "Understanding Ontogenetic Depth, Part I" he pretty well says nothing. Oh he used a lot of words, but all it did was point out that OD is still undefined and make us wonder how long it will be before he finally gets off his butt and fulfills his own ideas.
But please don't hold your breath. The only thing he has done different than Behe, Johnson, Dembski and all the rest is make a promise. Other than that, he's given us pretty much what they all have given us, unsupported philosophy and promises of more to come. Nelson simply didn't imply a promise, he stated it. Then he joined ranks and broke it, like the rest of them.
Nick Matzke (NCSE), in a comment on the Pharyngula, linked over to
Nelson's latest post:Understanding Ontogenetic Depth, Part II: Natural Selection Is a Harsh Mistress
Paul Nelson April 7, 2011 5:00 PM
Ontongenetic depth explained -- and a challenge for PZ Myers.
He called it "hilarious". Nick also said
"Paul, really, don't you realize just how silly this makes ID/creationism look? Ever heard of due diligence? I wish that just once you would exercise a little due diligence before posting your screeds about how there is some huge problem in evolutionary theory that everyone else missed before you came along and thought about it over breakfast."Due Diligence, sure one of the hallmarks of ID 'Research is due diligence (sarcasm inserted here). If Paul, or any of them actual understood and followed a process involving due diligence . . . no one would hear a peep from any of them. How sweet would that be?
Friday, April 1, 2011
I'm glad Topix Evolution Forum came back up because I got to read this:
"The scale of difference is appropriate when comparing the Japan earthquake's measurable effects on the circumference of the earth and the catastrophic earth-changing forces involved in a global flood that covered the Himalayas. Genesis does indicate that God provided the uniformity of nature we enjoy including a 360 day year. Probably the Sun was a perfect 400 times larger and farther away than the Moon from us resulting in perfect Solar eclipses as well, among other things. We can also observe the current recession of the Moon's orbit which accomplishes this about 6,000 years ago but is impossible in an evolutionary timescale." (post 55731 from a posted called Urban Cowboy)Isn't that just plain incredible? He was trying to justify how God originally made the Earth in a perfect 360 day orbit with 12 perfect months of 30 days each. I am surprised he didn't try and work in the perfection of a 360 degree circle, and 24 perfect hours of 60 perfect minutes each, and 60 perfect seconds in each minute. It was HILARIOUS. He started with an ICR article: Japan’s Earthquake Proves Noah’s Flood and took it to new lengths. It just cracked me up. For the record, my direct reply was:
"Anyone who reads this little diatribe will understand why I find you so entertaining. Look at the rationalization you had to build to justify this 'perfect' 360 day year. Without a single piece of supporting evidence except for a very liberal interpretation of Genesis (something you keep claiming is literally true), you re-defined the entire Solar System and completely ignored every bit of Astronomy theory, evidence, and observations. In order for this little POS to be true, you also have to re-define physics (including gravity, mass, centripetal force), geologic evidence (including continental drift) and even the climatological evidence of hundreds of ice core samples. It's mind boggling how much juggling of the facts you are willing to go through just so you can justify the existence of something that you are willing to say in a different breath cannot and should not require justification. You really need to take this on the road! Even Jesus is snickering at you right now! " (Post 55743)Can't wait to see if he responds. I kinda doubt it. Urban Cowboy starts ignoring people who don't buy into his version of the Bible. Just because 99% of the Christians in the world wouldn't recognize it either isn't a deterrent. You really ought to wander by and join in, it's fun!