In a recent thread a misconception about the ID perps Top Six was
exposed. Some long time posters on the science side of ID/creationist
issue had in the words of one of them a "profound" misconception of what
the Top Six did to IDiocy on TO. Back in Nov. 2017 the ID perps at the Discovery Institute put out their Top Six best "evidence" for the
creationist ID scam. They did it at the same time that they were
running the last bait and switch on the Utah creationist rubes. This
was the last creationist attempt to teach the junk until some West
Virginia legislator recently tried to get a one sentence insertion into
an existing act that was about teachers not having to change grades in
order to recommend passing a student on to the next level.

The ID perps had never done anything like it since the ID scam started
with the creation of the ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute. They
not only listed their top six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments, but they claimed that they were ranked 1 to 6, not in level of significance to
the ID scam, but in their expected order of occurrence.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-the-universe/

QUOTE:
Editor’s note: In the past we’ve offered the top 10 problems with
Darwinian evolution (see here for a fuller elaboration), and the top
five problems with origin-of-life theories. But somehow we neglected to
offer a parallel listing of the top lines of evidence supporting
intelligent design. Many different pieces of evidence pointing to design
in nature could be adduced, but we decided to distill it all down to six
major lines of evidence. Sure, five or ten would have been more
conventional, but when did ID advocates start playing to expectations?

So here they are, their order simply reflecting that in which they must logically have occurred within our universe. Material is adapted from
the textbook Discovering Intelligent Design, which is an excellent
resource for introducing the evidence for ID, along with Stephen Meyer’s books Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt.
END QUOTE:

Luskin was the editor, and the others that were involved in the effort
were not named. My take is that there were multiple ID perps involved
in destroying IDiocy on TO.

I put them up on TO and described them just as how the ID perps had
described them. Not a single IDiotic creationist on TO would face the
Top Six. None of them could deal with them in an honest and straight
forward manner. I did not attempt to refute any of them. I just
continued to put them up as the best evidence that the ID scam had and
made the IDiots deal with them in their order of occurrence. After a
month or two Pagano found out that he could not deal with the Top Six,
and he was the only IDiot who faced them head on. Pagano claimed that
they were all bogus, and that they were not the best evidence for
IDiocy. Instead Pagano started putting up Dembski's failed junk. Years
before Dembski had retired from the ID scam as an abject failure.
Nothing that he had ever come up with had panned out, and not a single
Dembski IDiotic doodle was considered to be a viable addition to the Top
Six by the other ID perps. I pointed out this fact to Pagano, and
Pagano stopped posting and hasn't posted since. No refutation of the
Top Six was required.

Glenn and Kalk just ran and for some stupid reason known only to them,
they started a program of going back to the ID perps for the second rate
denial junk that had not made it into the Top Six. Neither would deal
with the Top Six, and instead they would put up the second rate junk as continued support for the ID scam. Kalk did it for a while, but
couldn't keep abusing himself in that way, so he quit being an IDiot.
Kalk even came out and claimed that he had never claimed to be Hindu,
and came out as a plain vanilla biblical creationist. Glenn kept up the
effort of putting up the second rate denial junk for years, and recently stopped after a week where he put up 4 denial posts that he did not know
were Top Six topics that the ID perps were putting up as independent
bits of denial. Glenn had messed up and posted one of the Top Six by
mistake from time to time, but that week's effort made it clear that
Glenn wasn't interested in understanding anything that he was posting
enough to know what the topic was. Glenn has posted very little since
then. I did not have to refute the Top Six. All that I did was present
them as the ID perps had presented them.

By the time the Top Six was presented to IDiots, Bill had already
stopped openly supporting the creationist ID scam for several years. He
was into his "reality doesn't exist" phase where nothing was real, and
nothing could be understood. Before that he was one of the main
defenders of the creationist ID scam on TO. He was the one that had
made the claim that he knew some real ID scientists that had the real ID science, but he never produced any examples. In response to the Top Six
Bill made the claim that he had never supported the ID scam, but what he
was likely claiming is that he had never supported what the creationist
ID scam had always been. It was Bill's interpretation of reality that
had always been flawed. The Top Six are the same god-of-the-gaps
arguments that the scientific creationists resorted to when they decided
that there wasn't any creation science that they wanted to do. The Big
Bang, fine tuning, the origin of life, the flagellum as a designed
machine, the Cambrian explosion, and gaps in the human fossil record had
all become standard scientific creationist gap denial arguments by the
time that the Supreme Court was hearing the Louisiana creation science
case in the mid 1980's The creationist ID perps had continued using
them because they could think of nothing else to do.

This all happened without any refutation of the Top Six on my part. All
that I did was make the IDiots face what ID had always been. Dean and
MarkE kept trying to post Top Six topics one at a time as disembodied
bits of god-of-the-gaps denial. This is how the Top Six had
traditionally been fed to the creationist rubes for decades, and it was
the only way that they could deal with the Top Six. They just used them
as "fire and forget" bits of gap denial, and never wanted to consider
one after moving on to another. Dean may still not understand why the
other IDiot type creationists could not deal with the Top Six. He even
claimed that I was not refuting the Top Six, and I had to tell him that
I never had tried to refute the Top Six. Dean asked for assistance from
the other IDiots in explaining what the issue with the Top Six was, but
no one ever helped him out. He made that request twice. He made it the
first time he was confronted by the Top Six, and the second time is when
he claimed to have forgotten what had happened the previous time, and I
had to give him a link to the post. No one helped him out. He kept
posting Top Six topics in his off and on posting history, and he kept
claiming that he did not remember the previous times. The last time he
finally admitted that he did not want to understand the Top Six with
respect to his religious beliefs, and I think that he finally got why
the others couldn't stand the Top Six because he stopped arguing after
making that admission. It was obvious that he was putting up the god-of-the-gaps denial in order to support his religious belief, but
very few IDiot type creationists want to believe in the designer that
fits into the Top Six gaps in the "order simply reflecting that in which
they must logically have occurred within our universe.".

MarkE kept putting up the Top Six topics one at a time. He started concentrating on the origin of life (#3 of the Top Six). MarkE had been posting on TO for a couple decades, and had never bought into the ID
scam "science", but he could not give up on the gap denial. For some
reason he settled on defining the gap, and he set up the initial
conditions and environment of the earth at that time in order to claim
that it was all too improbable. In doing this he had to understand what
was around the gap that science has had a decent amount of success in
figuring out. I just had to suggest that he put his designer into the
gap and see how that worked out. He objected that he didn't have to do
that, but it would be stupid not to do it because the reason for the gap
denial is to support his religious beliefs. It turned out that the god
that fit into that gap wasn't the one that MarkE wanted to believe in. I
did not have to refute the origin of life god-of-the-gap denial. All I
had to do was get MarkE to use it as a positive legitimate argument to
support his religious beliefs.

This is the case for the vast majority of IDiot type biblical
creationists in existence. Everyone on TO should understand that
because even though the AIG still uses the Big Bang gap (#1 of the Top
Six) to fool the rubes at their creation museum the Big Bang is one of
the science topics that IDiot type creationists have wanted to remove,
along with biological evolution, from the public school science
standards in several states, and they succeeded for a while in Kansas.
It may be one of the best fool the rubes gap denial arguments, but the
IDiot type creationists do not want their kids to understand anything
about the Big Bang.

All this means is that I never had to refute the Top Six. The ID perps
killed ID on TO by presenting them as the best evidence that they had,
and telling the rubes that they were presented in their order of occurrence.

A typical post about the Top Six that I have frequently linked back to: https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/a2K79skPGXI/m/uDwx0i-_BAAJ

I do not try to refute the Top Six in the post linked to above. I just
present the Top Six as the ID perps have presented them, and I note how
even the ID perps can't stand them. It should be apparent that my use
of the Top Six depends on them being the best evidence that the ID perps
have. There is no need to refute the Top Six because there just are not
many IDiotic type creationists that can place their god in the gaps when
they are presented as a whole and in their order of occurrence. Sewell
has to place them out of order of occurrence and drop out IC and the
Cambrian explosion. Miller has to drop out the Big Bang. Sewell makes
the mistake of telling the rubes that the Big Bang occurred 13 billion
years ago, and the majority of IDiot type creationists still in
existence are YEC, so Miller just dropped it out. If you read the
original Top Six the ID perps were careful to not mention when the Big
Bang happened even though they listed it as occurring first among the
Top Six. The ID perp's "Big Tent", where all biblical creationists were welcome, was always a lie, and the ID perps have only kept lying to the
rubes in order to keep the money rolling in. Most of the original ID
perps are old earth creationists, and their ID arguments never supported
YEC. When Luskin came back from getting a geology PhD he told the
creationist rubes that he had been working on 3 billion year old
sedimentary rocks. The Big Tent where all Biblical beliefs were welcome
had always been a lie.

So the profound misconception, that I have been trying to refute the Top
Six, is a profound misconception. The Top Six never had to be refuted.
It was the IDiot type creationists that had to go into denial about them because they had to deal with them as what ID had always been, and none
of them wanted to believe in the designer that filled those gaps in
their order of occurrence. The designer that fills the Top Six gaps is
not Biblical enough for most IDiotic type creationists.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 4/2/2023 3:11 PM, RonO wrote:

In a recent thread a misconception about the ID perps Top Six was
exposed.  Some long time posters on the science side of ID/creationist
issue had in the words of one of them a "profound" misconception of what
the Top Six did to IDiocy on TO.  Back in Nov. 2017 the ID perps at the Discovery Institute put out their Top Six best "evidence" for the
creationist ID scam.  They did it at the same time that they were
running the last bait and switch on the Utah creationist rubes.  This
was the last creationist attempt to teach the junk until some West
Virginia legislator recently tried to get a one sentence insertion into
an existing act that was about teachers not having to change grades in
order to recommend passing a student on to the next level.

The ID perps had never done anything like it since the ID scam started
with the creation of the ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute.  They
not only listed their top six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments, but they claimed that they were ranked 1 to 6, not in level of significance to
the ID scam, but in their expected order of occurrence.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-the-universe/

QUOTE:
Editor’s note: In the past we’ve offered the top 10 problems with Darwinian evolution (see here for a fuller elaboration), and the top
five problems with origin-of-life theories. But somehow we neglected to
offer a parallel listing of the top lines of evidence supporting
intelligent design. Many different pieces of evidence pointing to design
in nature could be adduced, but we decided to distill it all down to six major lines of evidence. Sure, five or ten would have been more
conventional, but when did ID advocates start playing to expectations?

So here they are, their order simply reflecting that in which they must logically have occurred within our universe. Material is adapted from
the textbook Discovering Intelligent Design, which is an excellent
resource for introducing the evidence for ID, along with Stephen Meyer’s books Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt.
END QUOTE:

Luskin was the editor, and the others that were involved in the effort
were not named.  My take is that there were multiple ID perps involved
in destroying IDiocy on TO.

I put them up on TO and described them just as how the ID perps had
described them.  Not a single IDiotic creationist on TO would face the
Top Six.  None of them could deal with them in an honest and straight forward manner.  I did not attempt to refute any of them.  I just
continued to put them up as the best evidence that the ID scam had and
made the IDiots deal with them in their order of occurrence.  After a
month or two Pagano found out that he could not deal with the Top Six,
and he was the only IDiot who faced them head on.  Pagano claimed that
they were all bogus, and that they were not the best evidence for
IDiocy.  Instead Pagano started putting up Dembski's failed junk.  Years before Dembski had retired from the ID scam as an abject failure.
Nothing that he had ever come up with had panned out, and not a single Dembski IDiotic doodle was considered to be a viable addition to the Top
Six by the other ID perps.  I pointed out this fact to Pagano, and
Pagano stopped posting and hasn't posted since.  No refutation of the
Top Six was required.

Glenn and Kalk just ran and for some stupid reason known only to them,
they started a program of going back to the ID perps for the second rate denial junk that had not made it into the Top Six.  Neither would deal
with the Top Six, and instead they would put up the second rate junk as continued support for the ID scam.  Kalk did it for a while, but
couldn't keep abusing himself in that way, so he quit being an IDiot.
Kalk even came out and claimed that he had never claimed to be Hindu,
and came out as a plain vanilla biblical creationist.  Glenn kept up the effort of putting up the second rate denial junk for years, and recently stopped after a week where he put up 4 denial posts that he did not know
were Top Six topics that the ID perps were putting up as independent
bits of denial.  Glenn had messed up and posted one of the Top Six by mistake from time to time, but that week's effort made it clear that
Glenn wasn't interested in understanding anything that he was posting
enough to know what the topic was.  Glenn has posted very little since then.  I did not have to refute the Top Six.  All that I did was present them as the ID perps had presented them.

By the time the Top Six was presented to IDiots, Bill had already
stopped openly supporting the creationist ID scam for several years.  He
was into his "reality doesn't exist" phase where nothing was real, and nothing could be understood.  Before that he was one of the main
defenders of the creationist ID scam on TO.  He was the one that had
made the claim that he knew some real ID scientists that had the real ID science, but he never produced any examples.  In response to the Top Six Bill made the claim that he had never supported the ID scam, but what he
was likely claiming is that he had never supported what the creationist
ID scam had always been.  It was Bill's interpretation of reality that
had always been flawed.  The Top Six are the same god-of-the-gaps
arguments that the scientific creationists resorted to when they decided
that there wasn't any creation science that they wanted to do.  The Big Bang, fine tuning, the origin of life, the flagellum as a designed
machine, the Cambrian explosion, and gaps in the human fossil record had
all become standard scientific creationist gap denial arguments by the
time that the Supreme Court was hearing the Louisiana creation science
case in the mid 1980's  The creationist ID perps had continued using
them because they could think of nothing else to do.

This all happened without any refutation of the Top Six on my part.  All that I did was make the IDiots face what ID had always been.  Dean and
MarkE kept trying to post Top Six topics one at a time as disembodied
bits of god-of-the-gaps denial.  This is how the Top Six had
traditionally been fed to the creationist rubes for decades, and it was
the only way that they could deal with the Top Six.  They just used them
as "fire and forget" bits of gap denial, and never wanted to consider
one after moving on to another.  Dean may still not understand why the
other IDiot type creationists could not deal with the Top Six.  He even claimed that I was not refuting the Top Six, and I had to tell him that
I never had tried to refute the Top Six.  Dean asked for assistance from
the other IDiots in explaining what the issue with the Top Six was, but
no one ever helped him out.  He made that request twice.  He made it the first time he was confronted by the Top Six, and the second time is when
he claimed to have forgotten what had happened the previous time, and I
had to give him a link to the post.  No one helped him out.  He kept posting Top Six topics in his off and on posting history, and he kept claiming that he did not remember the previous times.  The last time he finally admitted that he did not want to understand the Top Six with
respect to his religious beliefs, and I think that he finally got why
the others couldn't stand the Top Six because he stopped arguing after
making that admission.  It was obvious that he was putting up the god-of-the-gaps denial in order to support his religious belief, but
very few IDiot type creationists want to believe in the designer that
fits into the Top Six gaps in the "order simply reflecting that in which
they must logically have occurred within our universe.".

MarkE kept putting up the Top Six topics one at a time.  He started concentrating on the origin of life (#3 of the Top Six).  MarkE had been posting on TO for a couple decades, and had never bought into the ID
scam "science", but he could not give up on the gap denial.  For some
reason he settled on defining the gap, and he set up the initial
conditions and environment of the earth at that time in order to claim
that it was all too improbable.  In doing this he had to understand what
was around the gap that science has had a decent amount of success in figuring out.  I just had to suggest that he put his designer into the
gap and see how that worked out.  He objected that he didn't have to do that, but it would be stupid not to do it because the reason for the gap denial is to support his religious beliefs.  It turned out that the god
that fit into that gap wasn't the one that MarkE wanted to believe in. I
did not have to refute the origin of life god-of-the-gap denial.  All I
had to do was get MarkE to use it as a positive legitimate argument to support his religious beliefs.

This is the case for the vast majority of IDiot type biblical
creationists in existence.  Everyone on TO should understand that
because even though the AIG still uses the Big Bang gap (#1 of the Top
Six) to fool the rubes at their creation museum the Big Bang is one of
the science topics that IDiot type creationists have wanted to remove,
along with biological evolution, from the public school science
standards in several states, and they succeeded for a while in Kansas.
It may be one of the best fool the rubes gap denial arguments, but the
IDiot type creationists do not want their kids to understand anything
about the Big Bang.

All this means is that I never had to refute the Top Six.  The ID perps killed ID on TO by presenting them as the best evidence that they had,
and telling the rubes that they were presented in their order of
occurrence.

A typical post about the Top Six that I have frequently linked back to: https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/a2K79skPGXI/m/uDwx0i-_BAAJ

I do not try to refute the Top Six in the post linked to above.  I just present the Top Six as the ID perps have presented them, and I note how
even the ID perps can't stand them.  It should be apparent that my use
of the Top Six depends on them being the best evidence that the ID perps have.  There is no need to refute the Top Six because there just are not many IDiotic type creationists that can place their god in the gaps when
they are presented as a whole and in their order of occurrence.  Sewell
has to place them out of order of occurrence and drop out IC and the
Cambrian explosion.  Miller has to drop out the Big Bang.  Sewell makes
the mistake of telling the rubes that the Big Bang occurred 13 billion
years ago, and the majority of IDiot type creationists still in
existence are YEC, so Miller just dropped it out.  If you read the
original Top Six the ID perps were careful to not mention when the Big
Bang happened even though they listed it as occurring first among the
Top Six.  The ID perp's "Big Tent", where all biblical creationists were welcome, was always a lie, and the ID perps have only kept lying to the
rubes in order to keep the money rolling in.  Most of the original ID
perps are old earth creationists, and their ID arguments never supported
YEC. When Luskin came back from getting a geology PhD he told the
creationist rubes that he had been working on 3 billion  year old sedimentary rocks.  The Big Tent where all Biblical beliefs were welcome
had always been a lie.

So the profound misconception, that I have been trying to refute the Top
Six, is a profound misconception.  The Top Six never had to be refuted.
It was the IDiot type creationists that had to go into denial about them because they had to deal with them as what ID had always been, and none
of them wanted to believe in the designer that filled those gaps in
their order of occurrence.  The designer that fills the Top Six gaps is
not Biblical enough for most IDiotic type creationists.

Ron Okimoto

Well Kalk has posted a nothing post without comment nor addition to this historical account. If anyone else has a different recollection of what happened they should put it up. Eternal September allows me to access
posts back to 2016, and unlike Google the threads are organized in tree
form so that you can easily see who is responding to what. There should
be no further profound misconceptions on what happened after the ID
perps posted the Top Six back in Nov. 2017. I do not know how long I
will be able to access those 2017 and 2018 posts, so if you have a
different recollection, this is the time to put up your recollections
and any evidence that you may have.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 4/10/2023 7:45 PM, RonO wrote:

On 4/2/2023 3:11 PM, RonO wrote:

In a recent thread a misconception about the ID perps Top Six was
exposed.  Some long time posters on the science side of ID/creationist
issue had in the words of one of them a "profound" misconception of
what the Top Six did to IDiocy on TO.  Back in Nov. 2017 the ID perps
at the Discovery Institute put out their Top Six best "evidence" for
the creationist ID scam.  They did it at the same time that they were
running the last bait and switch on the Utah creationist rubes.  This
was the last creationist attempt to teach the junk until some West
Virginia legislator recently tried to get a one sentence insertion
into an existing act that was about teachers not having to change
grades in order to recommend passing a student on to the next level.

The ID perps had never done anything like it since the ID scam started
with the creation of the ID scam unit at the Discovery Institute.
They not only listed their top six god-of-the-gaps denial arguments,
but they claimed that they were ranked 1 to 6, not in level of
significance to the ID scam, but in their expected order of occurrence.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-top-six-the-origin-of-the-universe/

QUOTE:
Editor’s note: In the past we’ve offered the top 10 problems with
Darwinian evolution (see here for a fuller elaboration), and the top
five problems with origin-of-life theories. But somehow we neglected
to offer a parallel listing of the top lines of evidence supporting
intelligent design. Many different pieces of evidence pointing to
design in nature could be adduced, but we decided to distill it all
down to six major lines of evidence. Sure, five or ten would have been
more conventional, but when did ID advocates start playing to
expectations?

So here they are, their order simply reflecting that in which they
must logically have occurred within our universe. Material is adapted
from the textbook Discovering Intelligent Design, which is an
excellent resource for introducing the evidence for ID, along with
Stephen Meyer’s books Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt.
END QUOTE:

Luskin was the editor, and the others that were involved in the effort
were not named.  My take is that there were multiple ID perps involved
in destroying IDiocy on TO.

I put them up on TO and described them just as how the ID perps had
described them.  Not a single IDiotic creationist on TO would face the
Top Six.  None of them could deal with them in an honest and straight
forward manner.  I did not attempt to refute any of them.  I just
continued to put them up as the best evidence that the ID scam had and
made the IDiots deal with them in their order of occurrence.  After a
month or two Pagano found out that he could not deal with the Top Six,
and he was the only IDiot who faced them head on.  Pagano claimed that
they were all bogus, and that they were not the best evidence for
IDiocy.  Instead Pagano started putting up Dembski's failed junk.
Years before Dembski had retired from the ID scam as an abject
failure. Nothing that he had ever come up with had panned out, and not
a single Dembski IDiotic doodle was considered to be a viable addition
to the Top Six by the other ID perps.  I pointed out this fact to
Pagano, and Pagano stopped posting and hasn't posted since.  No
refutation of the Top Six was required.

Glenn and Kalk just ran and for some stupid reason known only to them,
they started a program of going back to the ID perps for the second
rate denial junk that had not made it into the Top Six.  Neither would
deal with the Top Six, and instead they would put up the second rate
junk as continued support for the ID scam.  Kalk did it for a while,
but couldn't keep abusing himself in that way, so he quit being an
IDiot. Kalk even came out and claimed that he had never claimed to be
Hindu, and came out as a plain vanilla biblical creationist.  Glenn
kept up the effort of putting up the second rate denial junk for
years, and recently stopped after a week where he put up 4 denial
posts that he did not know were Top Six topics that the ID perps were
putting up as independent bits of denial.  Glenn had messed up and
posted one of the Top Six by mistake from time to time, but that
week's effort made it clear that Glenn wasn't interested in
understanding anything that he was posting enough to know what the
topic was.  Glenn has posted very little since then.  I did not have
to refute the Top Six.  All that I did was present them as the ID
perps had presented them.

By the time the Top Six was presented to IDiots, Bill had already
stopped openly supporting the creationist ID scam for several years.
He was into his "reality doesn't exist" phase where nothing was real,
and nothing could be understood.  Before that he was one of the main
defenders of the creationist ID scam on TO.  He was the one that had
made the claim that he knew some real ID scientists that had the real
ID science, but he never produced any examples.  In response to the
Top Six Bill made the claim that he had never supported the ID scam,
but what he was likely claiming is that he had never supported what
the creationist ID scam had always been.  It was Bill's interpretation
of reality that had always been flawed.  The Top Six are the same
god-of-the-gaps arguments that the scientific creationists resorted to
when they decided that there wasn't any creation science that they
wanted to do.  The Big Bang, fine tuning, the origin of life, the
flagellum as a designed machine, the Cambrian explosion, and gaps in
the human fossil record had all become standard scientific creationist
gap denial arguments by the time that the Supreme Court was hearing
the Louisiana creation science case in the mid 1980's  The creationist
ID perps had continued using them because they could think of nothing
else to do.

This all happened without any refutation of the Top Six on my part.
All that I did was make the IDiots face what ID had always been.  Dean
and MarkE kept trying to post Top Six topics one at a time as
disembodied bits of god-of-the-gaps denial.  This is how the Top Six
had traditionally been fed to the creationist rubes for decades, and
it was the only way that they could deal with the Top Six.  They just
used them as "fire and forget" bits of gap denial, and never wanted to
consider one after moving on to another.  Dean may still not
understand why the other IDiot type creationists could not deal with
the Top Six.  He even claimed that I was not refuting the Top Six, and
I had to tell him that I never had tried to refute the Top Six.  Dean
asked for assistance from the other IDiots in explaining what the
issue with the Top Six was, but no one ever helped him out.  He made
that request twice.  He made it the first time he was confronted by
the Top Six, and the second time is when he claimed to have forgotten
what had happened the previous time, and I had to give him a link to
the post.  No one helped him out.  He kept posting Top Six topics in
his off and on posting history, and he kept claiming that he did not
remember the previous times.  The last time he finally admitted that
he did not want to understand the Top Six with respect to his
religious beliefs, and I think that he finally got why the others
couldn't stand the Top Six because he stopped arguing after making
that admission.  It was obvious that he was putting up the
god-of-the-gaps denial in order to support his religious belief, but
very few IDiot type creationists want to believe in the designer that
fits into the Top Six gaps in the "order simply reflecting that in
which they must logically have occurred within our universe.".

MarkE kept putting up the Top Six topics one at a time.  He started
concentrating on the origin of life (#3 of the Top Six).  MarkE had
been posting on TO for a couple decades, and had never bought into the
ID scam "science", but he could not give up on the gap denial.  For
some reason he settled on defining the gap, and he set up the initial
conditions and environment of the earth at that time in order to claim
that it was all too improbable.  In doing this he had to understand
what was around the gap that science has had a decent amount of
success in figuring out.  I just had to suggest that he put his
designer into the gap and see how that worked out.  He objected that
he didn't have to do that, but it would be stupid not to do it because
the reason for the gap denial is to support his religious beliefs.  It
turned out that the god that fit into that gap wasn't the one that
MarkE wanted to believe in. I did not have to refute the origin of
life god-of-the-gap denial.  All I had to do was get MarkE to use it
as a positive legitimate argument to support his religious beliefs.

This is the case for the vast majority of IDiot type biblical
creationists in existence.  Everyone on TO should understand that
because even though the AIG still uses the Big Bang gap (#1 of the Top
Six) to fool the rubes at their creation museum the Big Bang is one of
the science topics that IDiot type creationists have wanted to remove,
along with biological evolution, from the public school science
standards in several states, and they succeeded for a while in Kansas.
It may be one of the best fool the rubes gap denial arguments, but the
IDiot type creationists do not want their kids to understand anything
about the Big Bang.

All this means is that I never had to refute the Top Six.  The ID
perps killed ID on TO by presenting them as the best evidence that
they had, and telling the rubes that they were presented in their
order of occurrence.

A typical post about the Top Six that I have frequently linked back to:
https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/a2K79skPGXI/m/uDwx0i-_BAAJ

I do not try to refute the Top Six in the post linked to above.  I
just present the Top Six as the ID perps have presented them, and I
note how even the ID perps can't stand them.  It should be apparent
that my use of the Top Six depends on them being the best evidence
that the ID perps have.  There is no need to refute the Top Six
because there just are not many IDiotic type creationists that can
place their god in the gaps when they are presented as a whole and in
their order of occurrence.  Sewell has to place them out of order of
occurrence and drop out IC and the Cambrian explosion.  Miller has to
drop out the Big Bang.  Sewell makes the mistake of telling the rubes
that the Big Bang occurred 13 billion years ago, and the majority of
IDiot type creationists still in existence are YEC, so Miller just
dropped it out.  If you read the original Top Six the ID perps were
careful to not mention when the Big Bang happened even though they
listed it as occurring first among the Top Six.  The ID perp's "Big
Tent", where all biblical creationists were welcome, was always a lie,
and the ID perps have only kept lying to the rubes in order to keep
the money rolling in.  Most of the original ID perps are old earth
creationists, and their ID arguments never supported YEC. When Luskin
came back from getting a geology PhD he told the creationist rubes
that he had been working on 3 billion  year old sedimentary rocks.
The Big Tent where all Biblical beliefs were welcome had always been a
lie.

So the profound misconception, that I have been trying to refute the
Top Six, is a profound misconception.  The Top Six never had to be
refuted. It was the IDiot type creationists that had to go into denial
about them because they had to deal with them as what ID had always
been, and none of them wanted to believe in the designer that filled
those gaps in their order of occurrence.  The designer that fills the
Top Six gaps is not Biblical enough for most IDiotic type creationists.

Ron Okimoto

Well Kalk has posted a nothing post without comment nor addition to this historical account.  If anyone else has a different recollection of what happened they should put it up.  Eternal September allows me to access
posts back to 2016, and unlike Google the threads are organized in tree
form so that you can easily see who is responding to what.  There should
be no further profound misconceptions on what happened after the ID
perps posted the Top Six back in Nov. 2017.  I do not know how long I
will be able to access those 2017 and 2018 posts, so if you have a
different recollection, this is the time to put up your recollections
and any evidence that you may have.

Ron Okimoto

For those that have missed the boat in terms of what happened to IDiocy
after the Top Six came out, should take the time to figure out what
happened. If they have a different recollection they should put it up
so that it can be checked with what happened. Kalk likely gave up on
IDiocy over 3 years ago, and before that was just wallowing in senseless
second rate IDiotic denial and could not face the Top Six. You can see
the Top Six effect on about the last IDiot left on TO. Directed
Panspermia can't be reconciled with the Top Six in any sane fashion.
You have to posit god-like aliens in order to deal with the Big Bang,
fine tuning, the origin of life, IC, the Cambrian explosion and human evolution. It would take a special type of alien to be responsible for
events that occurred over a time span exceeding 13 billion years and
included creation of the universe and messing with our solar system to
make it fit for life to evolve. The designer responsible for the Top
Six is not any rational type of panspermic space alien. You can give up
on the Big Bang and fine tuning, but you have to evolve the space
aliens, and keep them in proximity to the earth and active for a period spanning 3.8 billion years.

Kalk is still posting, and someone might be able to get Kalk to state
why he couldn't deal with the Top Six and eventually quit the ID scam.
Bill might be able to state why he claimed to have never supported
IDiocy as represented by the Top Six. The Top Six are the same
god-of-the-gaps denial that the scientific creationists resorted to
decades before the ID perps put them up as their best evidence for
IDiocy, but they have always been put up as "fire and forget"
independent bits of denial that were never supposed to have been taken
as something that actually supported their creationist beliefs. They definitely were never supposed to be considered together as any type of coherent support for creationism as practiced by nearly all IDiots
including the old earth creationists like Meyer. Denton and Behe may be
ID perps that can deal with the Top Six because they both have given up
on the usual biblical beliefs about creation. The IDiots at Reason to
Believe can only deal with them by altering what the Bible claims, and
they have to "reinterpret" the literal interpretation. Pretty much all
the YEC IDiots in existence can't do that, and the Top Six are just more
to deny for them. If some god came to earth and claimed to be
responsible for the Top Six designer events, that god would be rejected
by the vast majority of IDiot type creationists as not being the god of
the Bible.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

For whatever reason several posters seem to want to remain willfully
ignorant about what happened on TO for the last 5 years. They obviously
had the wrong impression of what was going on, and they seem to blame me
for all the IDiots quitting the ID scam. Several of the IDiots didn't
stop posting they just quit supporting the creationist ID scam. They
are still biblical creationists, they just do not have anything that
they think is worth posting.

The misperception seems to be that I drove them off by pestering them
with some refutation of the Top Six best evidences for IDiocy that were
given to them by the ID perps, and calling ID the scam that it has been
for the last 20 years, the perpetrators of the scam, perps, and the
creationist IDiotic rubes, rubes. We are taliking about a creationist political scam that the creationists are running on themselves. The ID
perps do not run the bait and switch on the science side of the issue,
they run the bait and switch scam on the creationist rubes that believe
them.

It should be obvious that just stating plainly what the situation
obviously has been for the last 20 years of the bait and switch scam did
not do what they think. I have been using those terms to describe the
ID scam since around Dover (2005), and facing what the ID scam had been
for years was never any type of deterrent for the rubes that still
continued to support the scam. They all knew that the bait and switch
had been going down for years on dozens of groups of creationist rubes,
and it did not matter to the the rubes that still bought into the scam.

If you still have these misconceptions you should try to figure out what
really happened. I never tried to refute the Top Six. I only had to
put them up as the ID perps have fed them to the rubes. The ID perps
shot themselves in the head when they put out the Top Six. None of the
iDiots could deal with the Top Six in an honest and straightforward
manner. The ID perps had done something that they had avoided doing for
over 2 decades. They even claim that they hadn't done something that
stupid ever. They gave the IDiots the Top Six as a group and told them
that they were listed in "their order simply reflecting that in which
they must logically have occurred within our universe." There just are
not very many Biblical IDiots that can deal with the god that fills the
Top Six gaps in their order of occurrence.

There was never any reason to refute them. They were all the same god-of-the-gaps stupidity that the scientific creationists had resorted
to after they figured out that there was no creation science that they
wanted to do. The ID perps never produced any better gap denial
arguments than what were already in use by the scientific creationists,
and it is obvious that no ID science was ever going to be done. #1 the
Big Bang is already one of the science topics that the IDiot type
creationists want to drop out of public school science standards, and if
Behe or Meyer ever demonstrated that some designer was responsible for designing the flagellum (#4 of the Top Six) over a billion years ago, or
the Cambrian explosion (#5 of the Top Six) over half a billion years ago
it would just be more for the IDiotic creationist to deny. Any IDiots
with enough brain power to understand the Top Six as given to them by
the ID perps, know that they never wanted to teach any ID science,
because if you do not want to teach the best, why teach anything at all?

Regulars should want to understand what actually happened on TO over the
last 5 years. All they see is that IDiocy died, and they seem to blame
me. A couple of the last two hold outs (Dean and Nyikos) actually have
claimed that I was not refuting the Top Six with my posts, and I had to
tell them that I had never tried to refute the Top Six. I suggested
that they apply them to their religious beliefs, and Dean admitted that
he didn't want to do that before he quit putting them up. All he was
using the Top Six for was the denial that he used to support his
religious beliefs. He never wanted to build anything worth
understanding. Nyikos seems to have destroyed directed panspermia by
having to invoke god-like aliens in order to deal with the Top Six. It
is obvious that the Top Six do not support any rational scientific use
for directed panspermia, and just demonstrates that normal space aliens
were never going to be the IDiotic designers, just an excuse to put god
in there somewhere.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)