cool book

The universe resolves the "grandfather paradox" in a clever way; the minute you get very close to the guy in an alternate timeline to your own you get the worst diarrhea imaginable.

I mean like you just ate the seven-layer burrito from hell explosive-kind if you even get within a half-kilometer of the dude, or even think too hard about taking out the crazy old, I mean young, codger. You can tell he's in even the same city as you cuz your stomach will start gurgling something fierce.

I'm serious - don't try it. And don't try the seduce-granma angle, either, and try to be your own Dad or some dumb idea like that. You don't even wanna know what happens then...but I'm just saying, you know how some medications tell you if you have vomiting like "coffee grounds" to see a doctor right away? Those ain't coffee grounds...

Yes.

No, our time not wasted. Your time wasted, your knowledge decreased, your misunderstandings increased - /your/ loss. But of course, Berlinksi is happy because he is cashing in from suckers like yourself.

Wow! And JL is a creationist (Intelligent designer-ist).

That's a pretty old one, Phil. Got any newer ones?

Tom Gardner wrote: ===============

For the benefit of the uninformed - the context was like this.

Ms Rice Davies was a highly paid, 20 year old "call girl" and a witness in the trial of a related person. She claimed Viscount Lord Astor was one of her regulars.

His lawyer pointed out to her, while on the stand, that the man had totally denied this.

....... Phil

His real point is how insanely complex and utterly non-understood a few fundamental things are, and how many people think they have answers.

I thought it was mostly fascinating and, in parts, great fun.

Are you fundamantally opposed to paying for books?

Creationism is a possibility. Intelligent design isn't the same thing, but looks almost necessary to me. The flagellum motor is an example, and it's simple compared to some other things.

So he wrote a book about the obvious. Still better than claiming to have the answers of course but there you go, my judgment of the book being garbage was correct. Of course I understand if someone finds it entertaining, but you seem to promote it as a source of knowledge which is ridiculous.

Dimiter

=========

..... Phil

And Trump denies that he is an idiot - yet most of the world saw it clearly. Some people, however, think that he is "a very stable genius"

- after all, a very stable genius described him as a very stable genius.

Similarly, you believe Berlinski is a genius because he and his creationist friends say he is. You believe that he is not a creationist simply because he says he is not - despite then proceeding to spout nothing but creationist / "intelligent design" nonsense.

If he says he is not a Christian, that's fair enough. But the options for where life came from are either the result of abiogenesis and evolution, or "god did it". There is no middle ground. (Even the highly contrived "aliens did it" theories only push back this dilemma to the preceding civilisation.) The whole "intelligent design" mashup was created in order to pretend that creationism is "alternative science" rather than religion. It might fool you - it might even fool some creationists or "intelligent design" cultists, but it does not fool anyone who has half a clue as to how science works.

(And note that science does not disprove religion here. No scientist can claim to proof that god /didn't/ do it. All scientists can say is that there is no /need/ for a god in the explanation, and that "intelligent design" is a religious idea, not a scientific one. I've nothing against people being religious - but I strongly dislike dishonesty about it.)

When people like you call it "propaganda", that only increases its reputation amongst those that want as fair and unbiased sources as they can get. (If I want biased - often amusing, usually accurate, but distinctly one-sided and undiplomatic - I look at

Of course it is! Its as much junk pseudoscience as homeopathy, astrology, and crystal healing. What's it going to be next - are you going to start reading palms?

No, it is not his point. We know a substantial amount about how life might have originated on Earth, and a huge amount about how it developed afterwards. (Like you, Berlinski mixes these concepts. I suspect he does it intentionally to aid his false arguments, while you do it from wilful ignorance.) Berlinski denies the known facts, and fills in the space he created with fairytales he creates. He either knows it is a lie and is dishonestly conning people (it's easier to make money from fools who buy "cool" books than from thinking people who don't), or he believes in a god and dishonestly wraps it in his pseudoscientific pretend maths mumbo-jumbo. Or he is himself just another gullible fool who has drunk the koolaid.

It's okay to ask questions, or to look for things that are not well explained in current science - that is what scientists do all the time. It is not okay to take your own ignorance of a subject and pretend that means scientists are all wrong and your own twaddle is just as good.

Be open-minded - but not /so/ open-minded that your brains dribble out. You are embarrassing yourself.

I do find your posts entertaining though you have not demonstrated any knowledge I might be lacking - does this make it more clear?

Dimiter

/He/ utterly fails to understand lots of fundamental things, yet thinks he has the answers himself. He doesn't - he is either a liar or an idiot. I have no time for either kind of person.

I've seen what you think you know about evolution and abiogenesis. If your source of "knowledge" is authors like Berlinski, then I feel no urge to read more. When I want to pure fantasy (and it is a genre I like), there are far better and more entertaining books and movies available that don't pretend to be anything more than entertainment.

Not at all. But I am fundamentally opposed to paying charlatans for s**te that decreases knowledge and understanding instead of increasing it.

I have better things to do with my time than pay to read drivel (when I get it for almost free here!) and unsubstantiated nonsense. Watch his video and see who he reminds you of - a certain (unnamed) recent narcissist who had to be practically dragged from office after trying to foment an uprising to stay in power, and also apparently cheats at golf.

Designing working circuits for restoring old arcade games is more interesting to me and relevant to this group. My 6530 FPGA project is coming along well, and I thank the group for their advice.

John

I think he's smart and funny, because I read his essays; I didn't say genius.

As usual, you fabricate my beliefs as needed.

Another fabrication. I never said that I believed he is or isn't a creationist, only what he claimed.

In this book, he has not proposed the origin of the universe or of life. He has pointed out problems with some currently popular theories. In that respect, I sure agree with him.

How did this universe come into existance?

How did inorganic soup become a DNA-based reproducing cell?

Tell us.

Not at all. He has questions, not answers.

But since you refuse to read his essays, how can you say what he believes or understands?

Obviously. You know everything already.

David, let us move the topic to something more serious than books like that. I know s*it and s**te are generally the same thing and I know the latter is more a northern thing (sounds funnier to me), perhaps it is more Irish than anything else? Or Scottish? I know I am asking yet another thing I can look up but at least I don't know the answer to that one...

Dimiter

I've heard him talk. It was enough.

No, I don't. So I prefer to look at sources that increase knowledge (including, possibly, increasing my knowledge of how much I don't know), rather than decrease it.

Oh, for the love of $DEITY will you /please/ read some /real/ science instead of these creationist / "intelligent designer" / idiot / conmen authors? Do you really think no actual /scientist/ has thought about flagellum motors, and figured out some of the potential pathways to their development (there being at least three independent developments of flagellum)? Are you really so naïve? /You/ don't understand something, therefore you think /science/ doesn't? Look it up - try to /learn/ something instead of parroting the same creationist drivel that was debunked decades ago.

What's next on your list? Are you going to claim that half an eye is no use? That fossils are evidence of a world-encompassing flood? That lizard people rule the world, and David Icke is a genius? (Sorry, that should probably be "amazingly intelligent".)