IWETHEY v. 0.3.0
|
TODO
1,095 registered users | 0
active users
| 0 LpH |
Statistics
Login
|
Create New User
Welcome to IWETHEY!
IWETHEY Home
/
IWETHEY Board
/
Religion, Philosophy, Metaphysics Forum
/
DPRLCI (new thread)
Post #237,831
by
Another Scott
12/12/05 8:57:01 PM
Reply
DPRLCI (new thread)
Created as new thread #237830 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=237830|DPRLCI]
If you think being anti-OOP is controversial....
- (
tablizer
)
- (113)
- Dec. 3, 2005, 11:19:25 PM EST
well that pretty much sinks ID :-)
- (
boxley
)
- (100)
- Dec. 3, 2005, 11:34:40 PM EST
No, it is not a "soft" science
- (
ben_tilly
)
- (74)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 05:05:19 AM EST
it is a philosophy, noted soft science much like psychology
- (
boxley
)
- (73)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:06:58 AM EST
how about theology.
-NT
- (
bepatient
)
- (1)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:27:23 AM EST
subscience of philosophy
-NT
- (
boxley
)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:28:26 AM EST
No, it isn't.
- (
pwhysall
)
- (20)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:40:23 AM EST
Is sociology a science?
-NT
- (
bepatient
)
- (2)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:56:23 AM EST
In places, yes.
- (
pwhysall
)
- (1)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 11:01:31 AM EST
In part it is the same methodology
- (
bepatient
)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 01:31:50 PM EST
point out differences between the examples
- (
boxley
)
- (16)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 01:33:57 PM EST
ID starts with a creator.
- (
pwhysall
)
- (15)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 01:58:25 PM EST
Not really
- (
bepatient
)
- (14)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 07:44:12 PM EST
And how is that not creationism?
- (
pwhysall
)
- (13)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 01:26:12 AM EST
No. Well, sorta.
- (
drewk
)
- (4)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 09:22:03 AM EST
How is a designer not a creator?
-NT
- (
pwhysall
)
- (2)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 03:33:23 PM EST
If the universe designed itself in a fit of recursion
-NT
- (
ChrisR
)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 03:52:40 PM EST
That's what ID people say, and why I didn't say it
- (
drewk
)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 07:13:54 PM EST
Re: No. Well, sorta.
- (
danreck
)
- Dec. 8, 2005, 05:11:29 PM EST
Minor difference
- (
bepatient
)
- (7)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 03:52:31 PM EST
Same difference
- (
Silverlock
)
- (6)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 04:44:56 PM EST
No again
- (
bepatient
)
- (5)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 09:02:50 PM EST
No again
- (
ben_tilly
)
- (4)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 10:08:02 PM EST
Sturgeon?
-NT
- (
jake123
)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 11:13:40 PM EST
(Could be fun - with chromosomes.)
-NT
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 11:36:47 PM EST
If there is significance to the variable names, then
- (
jbrabeck
)
- (1)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 03:57:54 PM EST
It's fun seeing people guess but...
- (
ben_tilly
)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 04:19:28 PM EST
I feel that the other examples are not sciences either
- (
ben_tilly
)
- (48)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 09:39:09 PM EST
Agreed, social science might be a better descriptive
- (
boxley
)
- (47)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 01:22:41 PM EST
You are right that those are missing...
- (
ben_tilly
)
- (46)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 10:03:44 PM EST
Not interested enough to read the literature :-)
- (
boxley
)
- (45)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 09:38:58 AM EST
Thats the issue
- (
bepatient
)
- (44)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 11:34:33 AM EST
Can ID be experimentally disproven?
- (
imric
)
- (43)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 12:02:26 PM EST
disagree
- (
boxley
)
- (31)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 12:05:20 PM EST
Don't think so.
- (
imric
)
- (30)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 12:15:29 PM EST
if you can predict results from the patterns then
- (
boxley
)
- (29)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 12:48:17 PM EST
Nope. That's just genetics. ID is not genetics.
- (
imric
)
- (28)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 12:57:23 PM EST
Q for ID-ers: How I is the D of, say, flightless birds?
-NT
- (
Meerkat
)
- (27)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 03:54:07 PM EST
I always use hemroids.
- (
Andrew Grygus
)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 04:13:35 PM EST
gotta have something easy to catch and consume
- (
boxley
)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 05:51:33 PM EST
Intelligent Design is a dead give away...
- (
ChrisR
)
- (2)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 08:46:36 PM EST
Don't forget the other moral of the example you are quoting
- (
ben_tilly
)
- (1)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 10:23:29 PM EST
Or even -
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 07:44:29 PM EST
HD - Halfwit Design
- (
tablizer
)
- (21)
- Dec. 10, 2005, 11:07:56 PM EST
ID is supernatural by definition
- (
pwhysall
)
- (20)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 02:08:17 AM EST
That's just a fortunate side effect.
-NT
- (
drewk
)
- (6)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 02:10:43 AM EST
Not it's not.
- (
jake123
)
- (5)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 08:11:12 AM EST
I see I need to expand my Ministry.
- (
pwhysall
)
- (4)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:39:16 AM EST
I beleive he did, parts stamped made in mexico
-NT
- (
boxley
)
- (2)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:40:35 AM EST
That would be where every third guy is named Jesus?
- (
hnick
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:44:34 AM EST
Philistine.
-NT
- (
pwhysall
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:59:30 AM EST
Damn! You mean Janis Joplin was RIGHT?!?
-NT
- (
jb4
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 01:37:23 PM EST
Creator need not be supernatural. May be ultra-tech aliens.
-NT
- (
warmachine
)
- (11)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 09:48:38 AM EST
And they were 'designed' to produce us, of course...
-NT
- (
imric
)
- (10)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 09:51:18 AM EST
ID makes no assertian of the designer, designed or not.
- (
warmachine
)
- (9)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 01:56:48 PM EST
Except it's basic tenet . . .
- (
Andrew Grygus
)
- (1)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 02:08:28 PM EST
That's an extrapolation of ID itself, not a basic tenet.
- (
warmachine
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 05:26:30 PM EST
Here's you task for today, grasshopper:
- (
jb4
)
- (6)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 01:41:33 PM EST
You forgot: bring a bodyguard -
- (
Ashton
)
- (5)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:18:23 PM EST
What does the Prince of Peace have to do with ID?
- (
jb4
)
- (4)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:27:24 PM EST
Nothing at all - we're talking GOD here . . .
- (
Andrew Grygus
)
- (3)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:32:10 PM EST
Heard a lengthy discussion re Yahweh -
- (
Ashton
)
- (2)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 08:17:17 PM EST
look it doesnt apply to you gentiles, its a realestate
- (
boxley
)
- (1)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 08:52:42 PM EST
DPRLCI (new thread)
- (
Another Scott
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 08:57:01 PM EST
Nothing wrong with a creator
- (
hnick
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:05:27 AM EST
Post of the Week (and it's only Tuesday...)!
- (
jb4
)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 02:27:07 PM EST
Falsifiable, Trueifiable
- (
tablizer
)
- (9)
- Dec. 10, 2005, 11:03:20 PM EST
Patterns... Pattern institute?
- (
imric
)
- (8)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 01:47:07 AM EST
fairies exist, saw one once
- (
boxley
)
- (7)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:23:01 AM EST
heh, knew where that was going
-NT
- (
bepatient
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:23:59 AM EST
So the teacher asks the kid
- (
hnick
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:31:25 AM EST
They wear boots - ya gotta believe...
-NT
- (
imric
)
- (3)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 04:22:52 PM EST
I saw it I saw it with my own two eyes
-NT
- (
jake123
)
- (1)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 04:52:11 PM EST
Well all right now!
-NT
- (
imric
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 05:02:00 PM EST
And around here they ride Harleys.
-NT
- (
Andrew Grygus
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 04:56:43 PM EST
Me too...I watch Bravo....
-NT
- (
jb4
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 01:43:15 PM EST
What's in a name?
- (
ChrisR
)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 10:03:50 AM EST
Google 'ontological proof of god' for some pithy links
- (
Ashton
)
- (4)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 05:52:22 AM EST
see my answer to Ben,
-NT
- (
boxley
)
- (3)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 10:08:16 AM EST
Unsatisfying, just word/def'n pandering.
- (
Ashton
)
- (2)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 07:12:30 PM EST
look, if some mook wants to look at dna
- (
boxley
)
- (1)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 08:10:25 PM EST
Quite right-enough
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 09:09:38 PM EST
Sep. of church/state laws don't govern philosophy
- (
tablizer
)
- (19)
- Dec. 10, 2005, 10:56:12 PM EST
It's FRAUD if you call it science instead of philosophy.
-NT
- (
imric
)
- (18)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 01:48:21 AM EST
then psychology is fraud
-NT
- (
boxley
)
- (17)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 10:37:53 AM EST
This is news?
-NT
- (
ben_tilly
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 12:43:21 PM EST
Soft science.
- (
imric
)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 04:59:52 PM EST
That would be "Psychology is FREUD"
- (
imqwerky
)
- (14)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 09:30:36 PM EST
accuse me?
- (
boxley
)
- (12)
- Dec. 11, 2005, 11:00:42 PM EST
No, he didn't
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:33:13 AM EST
I'm still not getting the connection...
- (
pwhysall
)
- (9)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:36:57 AM EST
Negative.
- (
imric
)
- (8)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 07:07:51 AM EST
OK...
- (
pwhysall
)
- (7)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 07:10:47 AM EST
OT branch
- (
imric
)
- (5)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 07:13:28 AM EST
Damn Scientologists
- (
pwhysall
)
- (4)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 07:17:11 AM EST
ROFL!
-NT
- (
imric
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 07:25:59 AM EST
Anyone catch "Last Laugh 2005" over the weekend?
- (
drewk
)
- (2)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 10:01:12 AM EST
Yep.
- (
bepatient
)
- (1)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 10:10:54 AM EST
Ronnie, walking around, would scare me too...
- (
hnick
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 10:43:53 AM EST
ICLRPD (new thread)
- (
ben_tilly
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 11:44:56 AM EST
Not accusing you.
- (
imqwerky
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 05:43:18 PM EST
More like: Freud (pronounced: "fraud")
- (
jb4
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 01:32:36 PM EST
Just saying "I think it's science"...
- (
pwhysall
)
- (2)
- Dec. 4, 2005, 02:59:26 AM EST
ID ain't Physics. It's Meta-Physics.
- (
ChrisR
)
- (1)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 06:31:15 PM EST
\ufffdPrecisam\ufffdnte! - and before you start in that field
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 12, 2005, 08:24:44 PM EST
intelligent design: the agenda
- (
rcareaga
)
- (5)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 09:22:50 PM EST
And around and around..
- (
Ashton
)
- Dec. 5, 2005, 10:02:40 PM EST
300 years after the Enlightenment and we still get this.
-NT
- (
warmachine
)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 02:43:04 AM EST
This crap pisses me off
- (
Silverlock
)
- (2)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 02:03:15 PM EST
religion is an opiate for the sociopaths? probably
-NT
- (
boxley
)
- (1)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 03:31:32 PM EST
Not just sociopaths, everybody ;0)
- (
mmoffitt
)
- Dec. 7, 2005, 08:47:01 AM EST
I'm not persuaded. 47 kB .img
- (
Another Scott
)
- Dec. 6, 2005, 03:45:09 PM EST
God-Man\ufffd explains finally.. how it works
- (
Ashton
)
- (1)
- Dec. 8, 2005, 03:39:26 AM EST
I like the non sequitor version better
- (
boxley
)
- Dec. 8, 2005, 05:49:48 PM EST
i
we
they
.org
Powered by a boneheaded user-interface design!
91 ms