A Reasonable Forum on Religion, Science, Skepticism, and Atheism

Register or Log In

1. 

   Comassion
   Member

   Greets all! Next time you want to debate with an ID fellow, have this in your pocket.

   http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/08/directed-evolution-improves-microbial-fuel-cells.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

   Note the second paragraph from the end - the newer generations of bacteria, unlike their predecessors, actually evolved flagella, a longtime staple of 'Irreducible Complexity' arguments. According to IC, this simply cannot happen.

   Posted 3 years ago #
2. 

   Ty
   Moderator

   IC has been so thoroughly refuted that by this point were just making fun of it while it lies on the ground bleeding.

   Posted 3 years ago #
3. 

   phrankygee
   Member

   As with most arguments against creatiotelligent designism, the point of having good arguments against is not to convince the "cdesign proponentist" that he/she is wrong, but to prevent them from confusing and misleading ignorant bystanders.

   This is good ammo to have for just such a case. Thanks Comassion!

   Posted 3 years ago #
4. 

   Ty
   Moderator

   True dat.

   But I still like my mental image of IC lying on the ground after a severe ass whipping, crying and trying to crawl away while science points and laughs.

   After that Dover humiliation, I like to think that Behe's bawls crawled up into his belly and haven't had the courage to drop since.

   Posted 3 years ago #
5. 

   phrankygee
   Member

   Someone should start a band called Behe's Bawls.

   Posted 3 years ago #
6. 

   LRA
   Member

   LOL! :)

   Posted 3 years ago #
7. 

   Ty
   Moderator

   That is such an awesome typo that I refuse to fix it.

   Posted 3 years ago #
8. 

   Elemenope
   Moderator

   on another board to which I post regularly, one commenter by the name of RC Dean has what he calls RC'z Law, which roughly reads:

   Chances are any typo in a comment will yield a reading superior either in humor or in insight than the original intended word.

   Posted 3 years ago #
9. 

   phrankygee
   Member

   I didn't realize it was a typo. I just thought it was some of that hippity-hop internet bling-a-bling web lingo that the kids are all using nowadays.

   Now get off my lawn!

   Posted 3 years ago #
10. 

    Ty
    Moderator

    Yeah, as you can see, I am all about the leet speak.

    Posted 3 years ago #
11. 

    phrankygee
    Member

    Y'know, if I hadn't been a Youth Group leader up until a couple of years ago, then I wouldn't even know what "leet speak" meant. (Or "l33+" speak)

    I learned that from the church. They were concerned that parents, and counselors, and other adults in the lives of youth would miss out on coded threats of violence or suicide or sexual activity, if they weren't "speaking the same language" as the teens who needed help.

    So the church pointed "leet speak" out to its youthworkers, including me.

    Otherwise, at age 31, I wouldn't know what half the whippersnappers on this forum were talking about.

    Posted 3 years ago #
12. 

    Ty
    Moderator

    Ah, so they had to teach the parents what 'butsecks' meant.

    Posted 3 years ago #
13. 

    phrankygee
    Member

    Remember: if you don't talk with your kids about teh butsecks, someone else will!

    Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.