|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. April 2007 07:34
There is another interesting and revealing feature of the Uncommon Descent forum. Only certain posters can present their comments against a pristine white background. Here they are although I cannot vouch for any I may have overlooked.
DaveScot (David Springer), crandaddy, whoever that is, Patrick, whoever that is and William Dembski of course. I take it these are the elite that are presently in actual charge, those that can ban, ridicule or delete the comments of others. Everyone else, including such long time regulars as Gil Dodgen and Scordova, now have their comments presented against a sort of faded gall bladder green.
What does it all mean I wonder? Has it always been like this? Perhaps someone could explain.
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 10. April 2007, 07:37: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. April 2007 07:48
I am sorry that I overlooked Denyse O'Leary, naturally also one of the elite. I had to go back quite a way to find her.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 10. April 2007 12:57
I repeatedly posted following post at Pharyngula -and Mr. Myers repeatedly deleted it (maybe he still believes to the lies that I am John Davison sockpuppet). Anyway I have given in my post good advice to darwinists how not to poison themselves eating mushrooms (while believing darwinistic fairy-tales about aposematism/mimicry). Now the post is available there:
To the most poisonous mushrooms belong Amanita phalloides -responsible for 95% of the fatalities. One cap have enough poison to kill three people.
Anyway genus Amamita show as amazing coloration as shows mushrooms as whole. We know green, red, yellow-brown,grey-violett Amanita etc.
Going into the forest forget first darwinistic rule of thumb, that red one should be poisonous (aposematic) and those with green-hat one should be edible (cryptic). The opposite is true - those with green hats are above mentioned poisonous Amanita phalloides. Those with red hats are either Amanita regalis (using by shamans etc..) or the pink - Amanita rubescens - which is very tasty and considered by some people as the most tasty mushroom at all. But do not taste red Amanita muscaria.
So darwinistic explanation of reason of coloration in living kingdom should be considered as only armchair excersise - do not follow rather darwinistic fancy explanation as to coloration in Nature - it can cost you life.
See all my posts on pharyngula about coloration of animals that nobody bothered to refute there.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/03/friday_cephalopod_tasteful_and.php#c389004
[ 10. April 2007, 12:58: Message edited by: Martin ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. April 2007 14:55
Martin
Of course they do not refute you, just as they never refuted me. You see neither of us exist. We must not be allowed to exist and neither must our sources. I thought you knew that by now. Why do you think all my papers had to disappear (twice) from Uncommon Descent? Such has been the way ideologues of whatever persuasion always have dealt with their adversaries. It is either their way or the high way. The same fate awaited Leo Berg, Richard Goldschmidt, Robert Broom, Pierre Grasse, Otto Schindewolf and even the father of modern genetics, William Bateson. Even Einstein has made the short list! Don't take my word for it. Just look around.
It is gloriously revealing.
I love it so!
Thank God for "brainstorms" which has never found it necessary to stoop to such tactics. It is the most tolerant forum in the internet, as far as I can determine, the only one.
The chance-intoxicated Darwinians have drawn a very clear line in the sand.
"NOTHING is determined!"
Got that? Write that down and don't you ever forget it.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. April 2007 05:51
Well surely there must be some Darwinians out there that are not going to let their precious "faith" be slandered by senile old John A. Davison aren't there?
"He used to be a decent scientist but something happened to him in the nineteen eighties."
Some cowardly anonymous Darwinian.
Or is this stony silence one more demonstration that critics of the "one true faith" still, as in the past, do not exist?
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. April 2007 10:59
Martin
You must not refer to P.Z. Meyers as Mr. Meyers. He has a Ph.D. you know and that demands respect.
The Ph.D degree, as you may not realize, stands for "piled higher and deeper."
The three graduate degrees are B.S. which everyone knows all about, M.S and of course Ph.D. Please give my regards to "Dr." Professor Meyers, Ph.D. I would do it myself but I have been banned from Pharyngula - twice. I don't "do" Pharyngula any more, or Uncommon Descent or Sandwalk or EvC or Panda's Thumb etc. etc.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 12. April 2007, 04:17: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 11. April 2007 15:54
John,
I have given your regards to doctor. We will see how long the message will remain there before doctor will delete it.
Darwinists there did fail to response to my case of coloration of mushrooms. One would wonder why darwinists can explain complicated coloration of butterflies and cephalods and yet they are unable to give any plausible explanation of coloration of mushrooms.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/03/friday_cephalopod_tasteful_and.php
--------------
So it took only about five minutes before doctor deleted my message (and again after 10 minutes etc...). I will try again, hehe. Or in the morning, when doctor sleep after being tired because of censorhip.
I am little surprised nobody responded to my posts here. I would say my posts bring information most darwinists are not aware of.
I hope Doctor Myers remove my banning soon. As you see I am not provocateur and I am not professor John Davison either. I just wanted to discuss animal coloration and refute some wrong darwinistic ideas of it. There is still no answer from darwinists to topic here.
Btw. professor Davison asked me to give his regards to Doctor Myers.
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000370-p-35.html
Maybe darwinists on pharyngula are afraid to discuss with me anything - doctor could ban them too. Once doctor asked them not to response to my posts there. Obviously pharyngula-darwinists obey "democratic" rules of their master perfectly.
[ 11. April 2007, 16:44: Message edited by: Martin ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. April 2007 17:53
Martin
You are doing just fine making Meyers show his real self. Somehow you manage to avoid being banned, something I have never been able to pull off. We do proudly share bannishment from Panda's Thumb. We must be doing someting right!
I love it so!
You are my best ally and perhaps the only one. It is hard to tell don't you know.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. April 2007 20:40
Thank you Martin.
"The applause of a single human being is of great consequence."
Samuel Johnson
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 12. April 2007 21:16
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/04/john_a_davison_fool_in_his_own.php#more
I recommend that all who are sincerely interested in the freedom of expression and the search for the truth, visit the above to witness intellectual venom at its very best.
Any comments pro or con are welcome.
Know thine enemy or of course enemies. The more the merrier.
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 12. April 2007, 21:24: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 13. April 2007 00:46
I call your attentiuon to three signifcant comments in the above thread.
Comment #4 by Dave S. who describes me as Captain Paranoid. Could this be David Springer? Only he could tell us but will he?
Comment #19 by someone who thinks I vandalized own blog. Can you believe it?
Comment #21, a lengthy message, no doubt from Jason Rennie, who conducted the interview and who reminded P.Z. Meyers that he, among many others, had declined to be interviewed.
I fully expect the entire thread to disappear. It has happened before, contrary to P.Z. Meyers' claim to the contrary.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 13. April 2007 10:23
Incidentally, my interview with Rennie has been down loaded 190 times as of 10:00 A.M this morning.
Not bad for a senile, incompetent, deranged, over-the-hill whacko eh? I wonder how many times P.Z. Meyers' or William Dembski's or Richard Dawkins' or Phillip Johnson's or Wesley Elsberry's interview would be down loaded the first day. Never fear as we will never know. "Prescribed," "Born That Way" ideologues don't grant interviews on neutral venues. It is for the same reason they don't test their hypotheses if they even have them. It is called FEAR.
I love it so!
"A past evoluton is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 13. April 2007 12:24
John,
I have heard it just. The spoken word is sometimes much more better and persuasive as written ones. Good job.
Doctor Myers on Pharyngula seems to be nervous little - judging from his "article". Never mind, I will send some reply at Pharyngula later. He and his cronies thinks they can abuse and lie because he can ban those who disagree. As you saw I have no problem get there avoiding IP-check and explain matters. He uses dirty tricks (stupid pretext that I am you) so I disabled cookies.
Martin
[ 13. April 2007, 12:24: Message edited by: Martin ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Martin
Member
Member # 2001
|
posted 13. April 2007 15:04
Why are they so afraid of orthogenesis theory?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't believe it but it happens to me either. After Doctor Myers publicised an article on Pharyngula where he criticised with coarse abuses Davison and me (both of us are banned there, we cannot response and defend ourselves there) Doctor Myers somehow managed to shield his pharygula even from browsing. I don't know what dirty tricks he used - I deleted and forbade cookies from scienceblog and even using proxy doesn't help.
Anyway thanks Quetzal and other contributors who confirmed that I am not Davison and banning me under this pretext is false fabrication.
Why are darwinists so afraid of theory of orthogenesis (Eimer) or Nomogenesis (Berg) that they have more sympathy to protestant fundamentalist as to those proponents of theories of governed evolution?
You can see I haven't abused anybody here as well as there. That's psychological puzzle for me. Btw. many years ago Broom was treated same way as profesor Davison by both parties.
But professor Davison critized in above mentioned radio-interview Pharyngula and people can convince themselves where the true is now.
Maybe this is reason why Doctor Myers is so anger.
IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
