https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/08/intelligent-design-nearly-down-the-drain/
This is a sort of history of what the ID scam has become. ID doesn't
seem to have much of any future. This was noted in the Christian Post article from a couple years ago asking what the future of the
creationist ID scam was.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/what-is-the-future-of-the-intelligent-design-movement.html
The article was likely sympathetic to intelligent design creationism,
but didn't see much of a future for the ID scam, and noted how dismal
it's past had been. Jerry Coyne has a more negative opinion, but comes
to about the same conclusions that can be drawn from the Christian post article.
Coyne compares the 5 year and 20 year goals of the ID scam put up in
their Wedge document from 1998. I disagree with how much they failed to
meet their 5 year goals. By the turn of the Century they had produced
their teach ID scam booklet that was supposed to guide public school,
school boards in making the decision to teach ID, and had published an article in the Utah law review claiming that it was legal to teach ID as science in the public schools. They had created their ID scam video
that they claimed that they would make in the Wedge document, and they
had gotten into some public "debates" supposedly discussing the issue.
They were giving out the video and their teach ID scam booklet for free,
but you might have had to donate something to get it (I can't recall the exact means to get copies, but the claim was that they were initially free.). The teach ID scam booklet was free to download until sometime
after Dover.
This is an archived link from 2002 where you can still download a free copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20021230161955/http:/www.discovery.org:80/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC&command=view&id=58
The ID perps had done what they claimed that they would do in their
Wedge 5 year plan, but that success pretty much destroyed the ID scam. Phillip Johnson posted to TO in the late 1990's, but it was mostly obfuscation and denial, and he didn't seem to be supporting the ID scam, just creationism. Not very much was claimed about ID on TO in the
1990's. Julie Thomas was the first IDiot to post to TO and Nyikos
bought into the scam, but no one seemed to know what ID was supposed to
be. ID likely did not account for the majority of posts to TO until
after the ID scam bait and switch started March 2002. Before that most
of the posts were still about the old scientific creationist evolution denial stupidity.
The ID scam had picked up some steam, and the fact that the ID perps
were just running the bait and switch scam on any group of creationists rubes that had believed them did not block the cresting wave of ID
surfacing into the public view, and the bait and switch just kept going down. The ID perps became their most effective censors, and the bait
and switch has only failed once in Dover in 2005. They may have peaked
in 2005 in terms of IDiocy being a functional political scam, but honest
and competent support from anyone with any integrity ended when they
started running the bait and switch instead of giving the creationist
rubes the promised ID science.
The ISCID (IDiotic science organization) had a very short effective
history. It started with ID perp support in 2001. They would put up
articles that were supposed to be possible ID science, and they had a discussion group where the articles and other IDiotic subjects could be discussed. I and some other TO regulars would post there from time to
time in the discussion group. One of the most memorable papers for me
was the flood geology paper. The bait and switch pretty much killed the ISCID. After the bait and switch went down on Ohio in 2002 the ISCID
became moribund. The participation in discussion fell off and the last
paper was put up in 2003, that I recall. The site was basically dead
after that, and it wasn't until the Dover fiasco in 2005 hit the fan
that the ID perps spent some effort in cleaning up the site. They gave
it a new format and the flood geology paper disappeared. The flood
geology paper had been up at the site for years before it was taken down
in 2005. The ID perps did not announce the final demise of the ISCID
until 2008.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Complexity,_Information,_and_Design
The Wiki claims that the ISCID hosted their first online symposium in October 2002, but by then the ISCID was already winding down.
So the ID perps did succeed in many of their 5 year goals, but that
success pretty much killed any future that ID could possibly have
achieved. They had been able to convince enough creationist rubes that
they had the ID science to teach in the public schools so that a lot of
the rubes decided to take them up on it, but all the creationist rubes
ever got was Dover and a switch scam that the ID perps kept telling them
had nothing to do with ID.
I did not recall that the Biologic Institute was closed down in 2021.
Others might want to read Coyne's summary to get an idea of the current state of the creationist ID scam.
It is pretty clear that the creationist ID scam is pretty much dead on
TO at the moment. There is likely going to be a shift to just calling
it plain old creationism for any discussions on TO.
Ron Okimoto
On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 3:10:14 PM UTC-7, RonO wrote:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/08/intelligent-design-nearly-down-the-drain/
This is a sort of history of what the ID scam has become. ID doesn't
seem to have much of any future. This was noted in the Christian Post
article from a couple years ago asking what the future of the
creationist ID scam was.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/what-is-the-future-of-the-intelligent-design-movement.html
The article was likely sympathetic to intelligent design creationism,
but didn't see much of a future for the ID scam, and noted how dismal
it's past had been. Jerry Coyne has a more negative opinion, but comes
to about the same conclusions that can be drawn from the Christian post
article.
Coyne compares the 5 year and 20 year goals of the ID scam put up in
their Wedge document from 1998. I disagree with how much they failed to
meet their 5 year goals. By the turn of the Century they had produced
their teach ID scam booklet that was supposed to guide public school,
school boards in making the decision to teach ID, and had published an
article in the Utah law review claiming that it was legal to teach ID as
science in the public schools. They had created their ID scam video
that they claimed that they would make in the Wedge document, and they
had gotten into some public "debates" supposedly discussing the issue.
They were giving out the video and their teach ID scam booklet for free,
but you might have had to donate something to get it (I can't recall the
exact means to get copies, but the claim was that they were initially
free.). The teach ID scam booklet was free to download until sometime
after Dover.
This is an archived link from 2002 where you can still download a free copy: >> https://web.archive.org/web/20021230161955/http:/www.discovery.org:80/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC&command=view&id=58
The ID perps had done what they claimed that they would do in their
Wedge 5 year plan, but that success pretty much destroyed the ID scam.
Phillip Johnson posted to TO in the late 1990's, but it was mostly
obfuscation and denial, and he didn't seem to be supporting the ID scam,
just creationism. Not very much was claimed about ID on TO in the
1990's. Julie Thomas was the first IDiot to post to TO and Nyikos
bought into the scam, but no one seemed to know what ID was supposed to
be. ID likely did not account for the majority of posts to TO until
after the ID scam bait and switch started March 2002. Before that most
of the posts were still about the old scientific creationist evolution
denial stupidity.
The ID scam had picked up some steam, and the fact that the ID perps
were just running the bait and switch scam on any group of creationists
rubes that had believed them did not block the cresting wave of ID
surfacing into the public view, and the bait and switch just kept going
down. The ID perps became their most effective censors, and the bait
and switch has only failed once in Dover in 2005. They may have peaked
in 2005 in terms of IDiocy being a functional political scam, but honest
and competent support from anyone with any integrity ended when they
started running the bait and switch instead of giving the creationist
rubes the promised ID science.
The ISCID (IDiotic science organization) had a very short effective
history. It started with ID perp support in 2001. They would put up
articles that were supposed to be possible ID science, and they had a
discussion group where the articles and other IDiotic subjects could be
discussed. I and some other TO regulars would post there from time to
time in the discussion group. One of the most memorable papers for me
was the flood geology paper. The bait and switch pretty much killed the
ISCID. After the bait and switch went down on Ohio in 2002 the ISCID
became moribund. The participation in discussion fell off and the last
paper was put up in 2003, that I recall. The site was basically dead
after that, and it wasn't until the Dover fiasco in 2005 hit the fan
that the ID perps spent some effort in cleaning up the site. They gave
it a new format and the flood geology paper disappeared. The flood
geology paper had been up at the site for years before it was taken down
in 2005. The ID perps did not announce the final demise of the ISCID
until 2008.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Complexity,_Information,_and_Design
The Wiki claims that the ISCID hosted their first online symposium in
October 2002, but by then the ISCID was already winding down.
So the ID perps did succeed in many of their 5 year goals, but that
success pretty much killed any future that ID could possibly have
achieved. They had been able to convince enough creationist rubes that
they had the ID science to teach in the public schools so that a lot of
the rubes decided to take them up on it, but all the creationist rubes
ever got was Dover and a switch scam that the ID perps kept telling them
had nothing to do with ID.
I did not recall that the Biologic Institute was closed down in 2021.
Others might want to read Coyne's summary to get an idea of the current
state of the creationist ID scam.
It is pretty clear that the creationist ID scam is pretty much dead on
TO at the moment. There is likely going to be a shift to just calling
it plain old creationism for any discussions on TO.
Ron Okimoto
Well, recall that Mike Behe's total ID creationist career is that "irreducible complexity" cannot allow sequential functional mutations. So that would need billions of years for even little things like a bacterial flagellum to evolve.Vol. 333 no. 6050 pp. 1764-1767
Well, sorry Mikey you lose.
"Acceleration of Emergence of Bacterial Antibiotic Resistance in Connected Microenvironments" Qiucen Zhang, Guillaume Lambert, David Liao, Hyunsung Kim, Kristelle Robin, Chih-kuan Tung, Nader Pourmand, Robert H. Austin, Science 23 September 2011:
“It is surprising that four apparently functional SNPs should fix in a population within 10 hours of exposure to antibiotic in our experiment. A detailed understanding of the order in which the SNPs occur is essential, but it is unlikely that thefour SNPs emerged simultaneously; in all likelihood they are sequential (21–23). The device and data we have described here offer a template for exploring the rates at which antibiotic resistance arises in the complex fitness landscapes that prevail in
Multi-site mutations, functional mutations, TEN HOURS, why sequential mutations are functional, and more likely, and with medical applications.
On 4/7/2023 10:49 PM, Gary Hurd wrote:
On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 3:10:14 PM UTC-7, RonO wrote:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/08/intelligent-design-nearly-down-the-drain/
This is a sort of history of what the ID scam has become. ID doesn't
seem to have much of any future. This was noted in the Christian Post
article from a couple years ago asking what the future of the
creationist ID scam was.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/what-is-the-future-of-the-intelligent-design-movement.html
The article was likely sympathetic to intelligent design creationism,
but didn't see much of a future for the ID scam, and noted how dismal
it's past had been. Jerry Coyne has a more negative opinion, but comes
to about the same conclusions that can be drawn from the Christian post >> article.
Coyne compares the 5 year and 20 year goals of the ID scam put up in
their Wedge document from 1998. I disagree with how much they failed to >> meet their 5 year goals. By the turn of the Century they had produced
their teach ID scam booklet that was supposed to guide public school,
school boards in making the decision to teach ID, and had published an
article in the Utah law review claiming that it was legal to teach ID as >> science in the public schools. They had created their ID scam video
that they claimed that they would make in the Wedge document, and they
had gotten into some public "debates" supposedly discussing the issue.
They were giving out the video and their teach ID scam booklet for free, >> but you might have had to donate something to get it (I can't recall the >> exact means to get copies, but the claim was that they were initially
free.). The teach ID scam booklet was free to download until sometime
after Dover.
This is an archived link from 2002 where you can still download a free copy:
https://web.archive.org/web/20021230161955/http:/www.discovery.org:80/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC&command=view&id=58
The ID perps had done what they claimed that they would do in their
Wedge 5 year plan, but that success pretty much destroyed the ID scam.
Phillip Johnson posted to TO in the late 1990's, but it was mostly
obfuscation and denial, and he didn't seem to be supporting the ID scam, >> just creationism. Not very much was claimed about ID on TO in the
1990's. Julie Thomas was the first IDiot to post to TO and Nyikos
bought into the scam, but no one seemed to know what ID was supposed to >> be. ID likely did not account for the majority of posts to TO until
after the ID scam bait and switch started March 2002. Before that most
of the posts were still about the old scientific creationist evolution
denial stupidity.
The ID scam had picked up some steam, and the fact that the ID perps
were just running the bait and switch scam on any group of creationists >> rubes that had believed them did not block the cresting wave of ID
surfacing into the public view, and the bait and switch just kept going >> down. The ID perps became their most effective censors, and the bait
and switch has only failed once in Dover in 2005. They may have peaked
in 2005 in terms of IDiocy being a functional political scam, but honest >> and competent support from anyone with any integrity ended when they
started running the bait and switch instead of giving the creationist
rubes the promised ID science.
The ISCID (IDiotic science organization) had a very short effective
history. It started with ID perp support in 2001. They would put up
articles that were supposed to be possible ID science, and they had a
discussion group where the articles and other IDiotic subjects could be >> discussed. I and some other TO regulars would post there from time to
time in the discussion group. One of the most memorable papers for me
was the flood geology paper. The bait and switch pretty much killed the >> ISCID. After the bait and switch went down on Ohio in 2002 the ISCID
became moribund. The participation in discussion fell off and the last
paper was put up in 2003, that I recall. The site was basically dead
after that, and it wasn't until the Dover fiasco in 2005 hit the fan
that the ID perps spent some effort in cleaning up the site. They gave
it a new format and the flood geology paper disappeared. The flood
geology paper had been up at the site for years before it was taken down >> in 2005. The ID perps did not announce the final demise of the ISCID
until 2008.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Complexity,_Information,_and_Design
The Wiki claims that the ISCID hosted their first online symposium in
October 2002, but by then the ISCID was already winding down.
So the ID perps did succeed in many of their 5 year goals, but that
success pretty much killed any future that ID could possibly have
achieved. They had been able to convince enough creationist rubes that
they had the ID science to teach in the public schools so that a lot of >> the rubes decided to take them up on it, but all the creationist rubes
ever got was Dover and a switch scam that the ID perps kept telling them >> had nothing to do with ID.
I did not recall that the Biologic Institute was closed down in 2021.
Others might want to read Coyne's summary to get an idea of the current >> state of the creationist ID scam.
It is pretty clear that the creationist ID scam is pretty much dead on
TO at the moment. There is likely going to be a shift to just calling
it plain old creationism for any discussions on TO.
Ron Okimoto
333 no. 6050 pp. 1764-1767Well, recall that Mike Behe's total ID creationist career is that "irreducible complexity" cannot allow sequential functional mutations. So that would need billions of years for even little things like a bacterial flagellum to evolve.
Well, sorry Mikey you lose.
"Acceleration of Emergence of Bacterial Antibiotic Resistance in Connected Microenvironments" Qiucen Zhang, Guillaume Lambert, David Liao, Hyunsung Kim, Kristelle Robin, Chih-kuan Tung, Nader Pourmand, Robert H. Austin, Science 23 September 2011: Vol.
This was sort of like the Kishony experiment. They innoculated a devicefour SNPs emerged simultaneously; in all likelihood they are sequential (21–23). The device and data we have described here offer a template for exploring the rates at which antibiotic resistance arises in the complex fitness landscapes that prevail in
with a million bacteria and allowed them to grow in an environment that ranged in concentration of the antibiotic to a maximum concentration
that was 200 times what was needed to kill the bacteria.
It was likely selection for each mutation. Behe's beef is his claim
that 2 neutral mutations causing a selective change would take a
population of around 100 million to occur routinely, and would occur
much less frequently at lower population numbers. He claims that 3
neutral mutations that cause a selective change is nearly impossible,
but he hasn't found such an example in nature.
Behe's definition of IC started changing around the turn of the century,
and the current definition doesn't even require irreducibly interacting parts. Behe claims that the order and arrangement of mutations is what
makes a system his type of IC and has acknowledged that some irreducible systems could evolve, and he needs systems that could not have evolved.
The example that he has put up is his 3 neutral mutations that would be required to create a new selectable trait. These 3 neutral mutations
could occur in a single protein. They would make a system his type of IC.
It doesn't matter, most IDiots in existence can't stand Behe's IC
argument and Sewell dropped it out of the ID Perp's Top Six evidences
for ID. The last thing that most IDiots (most are still YEC) want to
see is Behe being successful and identifying his 3 neutral mutations
that had to occur in an organism that existed over a billion years ago
in order to evolve the bacterial flagellum. Behe would know what
existed before, and he would know what the sequence was after such a
change, and he would know the context in which the flagellum evolved. Success would not sell books to the rubes. This is likely the main
reason that Behe has never looked for his three neutral mutations.
Ron Okimoto
“It is surprising that four apparently functional SNPs should fix in a population within 10 hours of exposure to antibiotic in our experiment. A detailed understanding of the order in which the SNPs occur is essential, but it is unlikely that the
Multi-site mutations, functional mutations, TEN HOURS, why sequential mutations are functional, and more likely, and with medical applications.
On Saturday, April 8, 2023 at 5:55:14 AM UTC-7, RonO wrote:333 no. 6050 pp. 1764-1767
On 4/7/2023 10:49 PM, Gary Hurd wrote:
On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 3:10:14 PM UTC-7, RonO wrote:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/08/intelligent-design-nearly-down-the-drain/
This is a sort of history of what the ID scam has become. ID doesn't
seem to have much of any future. This was noted in the Christian Post
article from a couple years ago asking what the future of the
creationist ID scam was.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/what-is-the-future-of-the-intelligent-design-movement.html
The article was likely sympathetic to intelligent design creationism,
but didn't see much of a future for the ID scam, and noted how dismal
it's past had been. Jerry Coyne has a more negative opinion, but comes >>>> to about the same conclusions that can be drawn from the Christian post >>>> article.
Coyne compares the 5 year and 20 year goals of the ID scam put up in
their Wedge document from 1998. I disagree with how much they failed to >>>> meet their 5 year goals. By the turn of the Century they had produced
their teach ID scam booklet that was supposed to guide public school,
school boards in making the decision to teach ID, and had published an >>>> article in the Utah law review claiming that it was legal to teach ID as >>>> science in the public schools. They had created their ID scam video
that they claimed that they would make in the Wedge document, and they >>>> had gotten into some public "debates" supposedly discussing the issue. >>>> They were giving out the video and their teach ID scam booklet for free, >>>> but you might have had to donate something to get it (I can't recall the >>>> exact means to get copies, but the claim was that they were initially
free.). The teach ID scam booklet was free to download until sometime
after Dover.
This is an archived link from 2002 where you can still download a free copy:
https://web.archive.org/web/20021230161955/http:/www.discovery.org:80/viewDB/index.php3?program=CRSC&command=view&id=58
The ID perps had done what they claimed that they would do in their
Wedge 5 year plan, but that success pretty much destroyed the ID scam. >>>> Phillip Johnson posted to TO in the late 1990's, but it was mostly
obfuscation and denial, and he didn't seem to be supporting the ID scam, >>>> just creationism. Not very much was claimed about ID on TO in the
1990's. Julie Thomas was the first IDiot to post to TO and Nyikos
bought into the scam, but no one seemed to know what ID was supposed to >>>> be. ID likely did not account for the majority of posts to TO until
after the ID scam bait and switch started March 2002. Before that most >>>> of the posts were still about the old scientific creationist evolution >>>> denial stupidity.
The ID scam had picked up some steam, and the fact that the ID perps
were just running the bait and switch scam on any group of creationists >>>> rubes that had believed them did not block the cresting wave of ID
surfacing into the public view, and the bait and switch just kept going >>>> down. The ID perps became their most effective censors, and the bait
and switch has only failed once in Dover in 2005. They may have peaked >>>> in 2005 in terms of IDiocy being a functional political scam, but honest >>>> and competent support from anyone with any integrity ended when they
started running the bait and switch instead of giving the creationist
rubes the promised ID science.
The ISCID (IDiotic science organization) had a very short effective
history. It started with ID perp support in 2001. They would put up
articles that were supposed to be possible ID science, and they had a
discussion group where the articles and other IDiotic subjects could be >>>> discussed. I and some other TO regulars would post there from time to
time in the discussion group. One of the most memorable papers for me
was the flood geology paper. The bait and switch pretty much killed the >>>> ISCID. After the bait and switch went down on Ohio in 2002 the ISCID
became moribund. The participation in discussion fell off and the last >>>> paper was put up in 2003, that I recall. The site was basically dead
after that, and it wasn't until the Dover fiasco in 2005 hit the fan
that the ID perps spent some effort in cleaning up the site. They gave >>>> it a new format and the flood geology paper disappeared. The flood
geology paper had been up at the site for years before it was taken down >>>> in 2005. The ID perps did not announce the final demise of the ISCID
until 2008.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Complexity,_Information,_and_Design
The Wiki claims that the ISCID hosted their first online symposium in
October 2002, but by then the ISCID was already winding down.
So the ID perps did succeed in many of their 5 year goals, but that
success pretty much killed any future that ID could possibly have
achieved. They had been able to convince enough creationist rubes that >>>> they had the ID science to teach in the public schools so that a lot of >>>> the rubes decided to take them up on it, but all the creationist rubes >>>> ever got was Dover and a switch scam that the ID perps kept telling them >>>> had nothing to do with ID.
I did not recall that the Biologic Institute was closed down in 2021.
Others might want to read Coyne's summary to get an idea of the current >>>> state of the creationist ID scam.
It is pretty clear that the creationist ID scam is pretty much dead on >>>> TO at the moment. There is likely going to be a shift to just calling
it plain old creationism for any discussions on TO.
Ron Okimoto
Well, recall that Mike Behe's total ID creationist career is that "irreducible complexity" cannot allow sequential functional mutations. So that would need billions of years for even little things like a bacterial flagellum to evolve.
Well, sorry Mikey you lose.
"Acceleration of Emergence of Bacterial Antibiotic Resistance in Connected Microenvironments" Qiucen Zhang, Guillaume Lambert, David Liao, Hyunsung Kim, Kristelle Robin, Chih-kuan Tung, Nader Pourmand, Robert H. Austin, Science 23 September 2011: Vol.
four SNPs emerged simultaneously; in all likelihood they are sequential (21–23). The device and data we have described here offer a template for exploring the rates at which antibiotic resistance arises in the complex fitness landscapes that prevail inThis was sort of like the Kishony experiment. They innoculated a device
with a million bacteria and allowed them to grow in an environment that
ranged in concentration of the antibiotic to a maximum concentration
that was 200 times what was needed to kill the bacteria.
It was likely selection for each mutation. Behe's beef is his claim
that 2 neutral mutations causing a selective change would take a
population of around 100 million to occur routinely, and would occur
much less frequently at lower population numbers. He claims that 3
neutral mutations that cause a selective change is nearly impossible,
but he hasn't found such an example in nature.
Behe's definition of IC started changing around the turn of the century,
and the current definition doesn't even require irreducibly interacting
parts. Behe claims that the order and arrangement of mutations is what
makes a system his type of IC and has acknowledged that some irreducible
systems could evolve, and he needs systems that could not have evolved.
The example that he has put up is his 3 neutral mutations that would be
required to create a new selectable trait. These 3 neutral mutations
could occur in a single protein. They would make a system his type of IC.
It doesn't matter, most IDiots in existence can't stand Behe's IC
argument and Sewell dropped it out of the ID Perp's Top Six evidences
for ID. The last thing that most IDiots (most are still YEC) want to
see is Behe being successful and identifying his 3 neutral mutations
that had to occur in an organism that existed over a billion years ago
in order to evolve the bacterial flagellum. Behe would know what
existed before, and he would know what the sequence was after such a
change, and he would know the context in which the flagellum evolved.
Success would not sell books to the rubes. This is likely the main
reason that Behe has never looked for his three neutral mutations.
Ron Okimoto
“It is surprising that four apparently functional SNPs should fix in a population within 10 hours of exposure to antibiotic in our experiment. A detailed understanding of the order in which the SNPs occur is essential, but it is unlikely that the
Multi-site mutations, functional mutations, TEN HOURS, why sequential mutations are functional, and more likely, and with medical applications.
This one?
Kim, S., Lieberman, T.D. and Kishony, R., 2014. Alternating antibiotic treatments constrain evolutionary paths to multidrug resistance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(40), pp.14494-14499.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.1409800111
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 485 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 131:50:34 |
| Calls: | 9,655 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 13,707 |
| Messages: | 6,166,573 |