Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

mine are minyans, we all seek the same thing. If you think kids go around kissing perfessers asses anymore, you need to buy a bridge or two.

I personally don't expect anything from paleontology ... and don't blame paleontologists for anything except for that they present themselves hardly not as the Nobel Prize Committee ... in biology.

fm--do you have a copy of D&M to hand?

Hee hee. There is no BIOLOGY Nobel Prize. You r learning new things all the time here. Don't you feel like its time well spent?

As far as paleontology. Ill try to be patient since I have 2 on my staff and I find them vital to certain aspects of exploration and development.
Those paleontologists in top universities are actually associated as distinguished professors of Anatomy or are Department Chairmen of Anatomy in major medical colleges. YOU KNOW WHY??? CAUSE BY evolution, they, more than any other "bio' profession, understand the observable relationship of how organs and tissues develop in time and through the embryo.

You've shot yourself in the dick with that stupid assertion.

Verification in science means that a process or system meets the presented specifications and quality attributes; that a model fits the data; that a theory complies with the evidences.
If your 'evidences' are 'real compelling' they should be able to withstand the storm of all the verification tests.
You are presenting your 'evidences' and the explanations thereto as the truth of the last resort. Suppose this is so. The truth is truth ... in any understanding of the world. If it is true in microbiology, biochemistry, geology, radionucleotide chemistry why are you so afraid to verify and validate the data with math logic, computer science, combinatorial inferences, etc. What is the problem? The absolute truth is unshakable. If something is blown up by the first elementary verification and validation test most probably it must have been something else.

I don't have any source on my tablet without PAYING.Im not home now and my copy is there.
Try me, I love that book.

What about the unobservable relationships? There's no big deal in understanding the observable ones. Monkeys can do that.

Let me know when it is to hand.

I love the book too. I've read it twice and I'm going through parts of it again.

I deal in all sorts of math modeling for my daily bread. There are tons of codes and models and analytical means Math, as a tool, is OUTCOME BASED, that is, we can model all sorts of fancy conditions and guess what? math has NO ability to prove anything, ll it can do is verify by dimensional equivalency, that two sides of an equation are the same.

That's why we do weather modeling using digital codes and set up "fields" of data that correspond to already understood inputs.

Dave Raup once did a fantastic expansion to show, mathematically that almost 99.9999% of everything that lived , is extinct.
He used all sorts of gambling routines and gaming math to show how evolution works. Haldane once did an expansion that became known as "HAldanes dilemma'. In that he showed that, with generational fixing of mutations, the species population would run out of specimens. What Haldane didn't know was that multiple polymorh can "Fix themselves" in a genome, simultaneously. Haldane apologized for the mistake he made but Creationists still try to bring it up as if it were new news.

I use variograms, krigging, data mining,expansions andfeedback analyses multivariate analyses, factor analyses, trend surface analyses, spectral analyses, Fast Fourier trnsforms,, etc etc. Math isn't a problem Herald, youre trying, once again to mount a position of which you have no knowledge.

We see the theoretical physicists involved in all kinds of "MATHTURBATION" but does that mean that string theory is even a theory? I don't think that theres even any evidence other than a blackboard calculation.

Math aint evidence unless its just verifying something tangible

Bet you cant

every such realationship is presently or eventually observable, sensible, measurable, or quantifiable. Anything else isn't science its philosophy or religion.

The "eventually" is a belief. A religion. Wiped out by Quantum Theory.

Will you explain Bitcoin to me. An expert's explanation on Newsnight left Paxman as baffled as he was before he asked. Currently trading at 1 Bitcoin to $1,000 it must be presently observable, sensible, measurable, and quantifiable.

Sounds impressive, now what does this mean??



All my assets are tied up in liabilities. I have no idea what a bitcoin is or how to spend one.
I am not the target demographic for that stuff

Well--the "eventually" is a belief. To invent a way of life based on a belief is a religion. And QT shows, as I have said before, that at the extremities the observer influences the observed to such an extent that the only thing the observer can observe is himself observing the unobservable doing things that the observer has made it do and is thus a function of his own brain.

Just as we don't see the biologist's horse at the races or a tiger in a zoo. I really enjoy seeing the stall-handlers take 5 minutes to get a horse in the traps. Or one dump its jockey at the start and then chase the others for 3 miles and running around the fences.

I don't understand the mathematics of QT though. I think you have to give up girls and boozing to have a chance at that.

Whenever ros or ci. have mentioned QT I have sniggered.

Paleontologists know much more than you do in their field. One should respect such specialized knowledge, not disparage it from a position of ignorance.

But my point was that you are asking for a level of evidence in evolution that is far higher than what you content yourself with in other domains. When hit on the nose, you don't ask for a proof of causality for the ensuing bleeding.

I accept that paleontologists know much more than I do in their field. I can't say I respect them all that much. They seem to be a charge on the budget serving no economic or social purpose that I would be prepared to justify.

My admittedly ignorant guess is that they are a self-perpetuating job creation scheme for the dim sons and daughters of the higher classes for whom no other suitable work can be found.

They tell us the story of our origins. That's priceless. Paleontology is a popular science.

Surely you don't wish to know the story of our origins? It gave Darwin nightmares and dyspepsia.

Always look forward is my motto.

Yes I do, as most people, want to know that story. It's a great story you must admit. Much better than the myth the Jews borrowed from Babylon while in exile. And what light allows you to look forward, if not the light of past experience?

I know that that obtuse statement was directed my way and all I can say after all these years that Ive been preaching about careers, is that without paleontology we would not have relatively cheap oil and gas. For after the years of "guesstimating' , "wildcatting", and drilling oil seeps and shallow salt and gas vents, all recent production of fuels is highly scientific, quantitative and highly dependent on invertebrate paleontology and geophysics.(despite what the IDiots speak about "Abiogenic oil and gas")
My own little company primarily does investigation for Titanium ore deposits (and a little O&G) and I have two paleontologists on my staff and we are doing quite fine. Paleostratigraphers reconstruct environments of deposition (fast estuary channels are world "lag" repositories for illmenite) and reconstructing those environments of deposition is the job of paleontology and stratigraphy (Most paleontologists have an APPLIED rather than an academic career track).
When people recall the Cary Grant Character in "Bringing up Baby" or ", or that doddering old scientist in "The Beast from 20000 Fathoms", they must recall that it was a schtick based on portraying some exotic, little understood profession in which the "scientists"need be slightly touched by Dementia or be a cowboy like Roy Chapman ANdrews. It had very little to do with reality. We produce a few thousand paleontologys graduate students each year and less than 1% work in museums or "stamp collecting'
Most in research are involved in areas more closely related to medicine than museum studies AND the vast majority of paleontologists are swept up by oil and gas and minerals extraction industries.
The fact that spendi tries to denigrate a real enterprise , while, at the same time, he speaks from his barstool and recalls his childhood with "footmen", is really hilarious.
His use of terms like "Upper Classes" kinda sums up his cluelessness of most of the rest of the world.
Heralds inability to even envision the categories of Nobel Prizes is like spendis inability to verbalize what the known world is like today outside of his local pub .

Well, Ill tune in sometime tomorrow after we get home from the Pa gas fields where" paleontologist abound".

Obviously, especially with the example of causality you are giving (hit and nose bleeding – I truly hope for this to be nothing personal).
You see, this example is not coincidence of events as you are trying to present it. There is ballistics expertise that can prove how much damage to the tissue a blow in the nose can cause, and there is also medical science that can tell for sure (with probability above 95%) in the case of this and this damage of the tissue what hemorrhage could be expected ... and how far it may go.
So the example you are giving in the best case is inappropriate.