One bang one process.

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

Before Thwoth, Cito, Romansh, Fluttermoth, myself or any other contemporary poster in this thread actually posted, Paul was already trotting out this juvenile trick to evade addressing substance.

Post 187 directed at JayWilson:
pfrankinstein wrote:Spouting crap Jay, genius or simpleton spoiler?

Post 195 & 206 directed at John P.M.
pfrankinstein wrote:Alas 'simpleton spoilers' run amok and events over take me. How sad.
[quote="pfrankinstein";p="821790"]I'm fed up........ Narrow minded simpleton spoilers have sapped my will to write more and further recap and explain. Blah.[/quote]

Post 244 & 250 directed at Paul Almond

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="821790"]Simpleton spoilers abound.

sim·ple·ton (s m p l-t n). n. A person who is felt to be deficient in judgment, good sense, or intelligence; a fool. ...
http://www.thefreedictionary. haaaaaaaaaa[/quote]

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="831307"]
I use the primary colours as a means of simplifying explanation. If florence Nightingale had suggested her pie chart concept here i feel sure that some "simpleton spoiler" here would make reference to pastry and savory/sweet fillings.[/quote]

Post 253 directed at 3 members, but actually at everyone:

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="831341"]hackenlash, Paul Almond, Scar.

I label you all as "simpleton spoilers." You are clearly not interested in the thread, i will not be replying to any of your posts.

Wheat-chaff-sorted.[/quote]


On and on and on - Paul's endless gymnastics to evade substantive criticism of his stupid idea.

12 years of this egotistical insanity.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794933"]pfrankinstein wrote:
Repatician is a Victorian method of teaching that is still used today. The x-table is still taught that way.


thrower For brain-dead rote learning. snip.

Please do engage your brain and think before you post..[/quote]


Psychological projection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
(Psychological projection) is a defense mechanism in which the ego defends itself against disowned and highly negative parts of the self by denying their existence in themselves and attributing them to others
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

Do you consider your very existence, your being here, the result of an uninterrupted chain of "cause and effect" from bang to now?
Shame you can't establish your central claim that reversing this to the beginning and hitting play would result in the same events occurring ala your attempted teleological directionality.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... ml#p846440

The actual person unable to get off first base.

12 years ago, and still making all the same mistakes, still with the same gaping flaws in reasoning, still with the same absence of support.

The only thing that's changed is that his posts have become less coherent, somehow.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

[quote="Spearthrower";p="2794899"]Make this easy:

Provide a single instance of me saying evolution isn't a process.

I've alerted the mods to your incessant lies, so here's your opportunity to prove that you are not lying.

I've already provided a dozen instances proving you wrong, proving that I have never said evolution isn't a process, proving that you keep writing this lie then ignoring when people challenge you on it.

So over to you: provide justification for your claim about my position from this thread, or acknowledge that it's a fucking lie.[/quote]

Difficult to tell what you believe to be fact. You chop and change.

One minute Evolution is biological evolution , the next evolution is a process.

make it easy.and answer the question directly. What is Evolution? What is biological evolution?

Paul.
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

[quote="Spearthrower";p="2794938"]http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... ml#p846440

The actual person unable to get off first base.

12 years ago, and still making all the same mistakes, still with the same gaping flaws in reasoning, still with the same absence of support.

The only thing that's changed is that his posts have become less coherent, somehow.[/quote]

Who'd be a moderator with you mythering. A letter to sir. Isn't that how you got started?

Paul.
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794940"][quote="Spearthrower";p="2794899"]Make this easy:

Provide a single instance of me saying evolution isn't a process.

I've alerted the mods to your incessant lies, so here's your opportunity to prove that you are not lying.

I've already provided a dozen instances proving you wrong, proving that I have never said evolution isn't a process, proving that you keep writing this lie then ignoring when people challenge you on it.

So over to you: provide justification for your claim about my position from this thread, or acknowledge that it's a fucking lie.[/quote]

Difficult to tell what you believe to be fact. You chop and change.

One minute Evolution is biological evolution , the next evolution is a process.
[/quote]

There it is again moderators.

Clearly the guy cannot do anything but troll.


http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... l#p2794586

[quote="Spearthrower";p="2794586"]...your repetitive lying is confusing you.

For example, you keep on wittering on about 'process' as if I've said evolution isn't a process, despite me actively challenging you dozens of times to provide a single instance of me saying otherwise.

Again, because this is how the universe actually works, I can provide direct quotations from this thread showing that you are fucking lying again.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2785391

[quote="Spearthrower";p="2794583"]A hair doesn't evolve over time, Paul. It grows.
A hairstyle, however, does evolve over time, Paul.
That's because the word 'evolve' means 'to develop gradually', Paul.
We wouldn't say the hair evolves, Paul, because it just grows in dimension.
But, Paul, we would say that the hairstyle evolves because it changes in many and more complex ways.
What we definitely wouldn't do, Paul, is to say that a hairstyle evolves in a manner equivalent to that involved with natural selection, Paul, or pretend, Paul, that just because the word 'evolve' is used that it also has to mean that all aspects of the term used in Biology - shorthand for a process involving inheritance and differential survival statistically measured over generations of living organisms - also just get ignorantly transferred across as if anyone with half a brain, Paul, actually thinks that's logical, Paul. Like words, Paul, are fucking magic, or something.[/quote]

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2785633
Evolution is how biology has come to be - look around at anything biological today, and the process by which it came to be like that is evolution.
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2785431
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2778912
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2779773
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2780033
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2780433
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2781133
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post1 ... s#p1336229
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post1 ... s#p1336119
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post1 ... s#p1336084
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post1 ... s#p1337088
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post1 ... s#p1336583
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... s#p2777278


So why are you lying about what I said TO ME?

Are you that egotistical that you think you can somehow oblige me to believe that I didn't say what I clearly did, but instead said something you keep lying about?

Put up or shut your lying trap, Paul. Provide a single instance of me denying that evolution is a process: OF COURSE IT"S A FUCKING PROCESS, you total dingbat! Evolution, being change over time, necessarily involves a process, i.e. a sequence of events over time... it's like arguing with a 3 year old.

I've shown so many instances of your lying now - it's time you start owning this. If you can't change your behavior, why do you expect others to change their response to you?

Same input - same output.

Repeat these baseless lies again about me, and I will reference these to the moderators - you more than deserve it, despite everyone here giving you ample chances to engage with some basic fucking honesty.[/quote]
Last edited by Spearthrower on Jan 15, 2023 12:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794940"]
make it easy.and answer the question directly. What is Evolution? What is biological evolution?
[/quote]


I can't make it any easier for you than typing it dozens of times.

Your refusal to acknowledge what's written isn't my problem.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... l#p2794900

That's now a link to a post with the answer contained therein, linking to a prior post with the answer contained therein, linking to a prior post with the answer contained therein, linking to a whole series of prior posts all with that answer contained therein.

If the moderators don't think this is trolling, I'd like to see an alternative explanation for it.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
Posts: 22593
Joined: Feb 28, 2010 8:32 pm
Name: Jesse
Country: United States
Location: Lewis County, New York

Re: One bang one process.

Post by The_Metatron »

Over 97% of his 1301 posts are in this topic. I intend to leave him here to rot. We have no rule here against being wrong, let alone being a second decade into the same wrong.

This idiocy is a god damned monument to idiocy. And, it’s ours to show the world how stupid stupid can get and for how long.
User avatar
Spearthrower
Posts: 33888
Joined: Feb 25, 2010 6:11 pm
Country: Thailand
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: One bang one process.

Post by Spearthrower »

It's not about being wrong that's the problem (I completely agree to this thread being a testament to his ignominy), it's him incessantly lying about what members have written.

He's devoted dozens of posts to just straight up lying about other members - it's a significant part of the last 100 pages.

For example, he can't show a single instance of anything I've written that can be read as me holding the position that evolution isn't a process. Yet he's stated that's my position dozens - literally dozens - of times. I've cited 8 instances of me referring to evolution as a process, so where's the obligation on him to substantiate his strawman?

It's that incessant lying which, even when I've proven the opposite, he simply repeats the lie that has to be taken as trolling. He can both be wrong and not be a lying asshole at the same time.

What's most frustrating is that I think it amounts to unequal treatment - if I acted like this, I know I'd end up with a caution and eventually a warning. How many of my own warnings are from him reporting my posts?
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
romansh
Posts: 3189
Joined: May 01, 2010 9:03 pm
Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Contact:

Re: One bang one process.

Post by romansh »

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794928"]
Paul ... after all these months are we any closer to an answer to "Do snowflakes replicate?"
Time travel to the past is theoretically possible. [/quote]
Is answering my question do snowflakes replicate? theoretically possible? Seems unlikely at the moment.

Be a dear and answer the question.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

[quote="The_Metatron";p="2794952"]Over 97% of his 1301 posts are in this topic. I intend to leave him here to rot. We have no rule here against being wrong, let alone being a second decade into the same wrong.

This idiocy is a god damned monument to idiocy. And, it’s ours to show the world how stupid stupid can get and for how long.[/quote]

Thank you sir for your honesty and running commentary on the thread so far as you see it.

I value your honesty. I want your opinion.

Do you see the fact of "process" as an irrelevance? Such a small fact: "process" not worthy of a line of inquiry?

The question is: Should we throw away our first knowledge? 

Can you be an arbiter?

Do you have a rational opinion, sir? 

You do understand why I am at odds with mainstream thinking; it is because my "first run to science definition" of "evolution" is "Tprocesshe cosmos."

I have not treated the little-known fact of "process" as nothing and poured scorn on it. 

My question to you sir is "What is evolution?"

What is your go-to answer to the question posed and why?

Paul.
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

[quote="romansh";p="2794964"][quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794928"]
Paul ... after all these months are we any closer to an answer to "Do snowflakes replicate?"
Time travel to the past is theoretically possible. [/quote]
Is answering my question do snowflakes replicate? theoretically possible? Seems unlikely at the moment.

Be a dear and answer the question.[/quote]

First you answer me this. Did Charles Darwin ever have a eureeka moment?

Paul.
User avatar
romansh
Posts: 3189
Joined: May 01, 2010 9:03 pm
Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Contact:

Re: One bang one process.

Post by romansh »

[quote="pfrankinstein";p="2795005"][quote="romansh";p="2794964"][quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794928"]
Paul ... after all these months are we any closer to an answer to "Do snowflakes replicate?"
Time travel to the past is theoretically possible. [/quote]
Is answering my question do snowflakes replicate? theoretically possible? Seems unlikely at the moment.

Be a dear and answer the question.[/quote]

First you answer me this. Did Charles Darwin ever have a eureeka moment?

Paul.[/quote]
How about you answering my question first. I have answered many of yours. Now answer mine!
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
Posts: 38785
Joined: Mar 03, 2010 8:03 pm
Country: Untied Kingdom
Location: Inside

Re: One bang one process.

Post by THWOTH »

pfrankinstein wrote:[quote="romansh";p="2794964"][quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794928"]
Paul ... after all these months are we any closer to an answer to "Do snowflakes replicate?"
Time travel to the past is theoretically possible.
Is answering my question do snowflakes replicate? theoretically possible? Seems unlikely at the moment.

Be a dear and answer the question.[/quote]

First you answer me this. Did Charles Darwin ever have a eureeka moment?

Paul.[/quote]Yes. When Wallace sent him his paper from the South East Asian archipelago.
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

[quote="THWOTH";p="2795023"][quote="pfrankinstein";p="2795023"][quote="romansh";p="2794964"][quote="pfrankinstein";p="2794928"]

Time travel to the past is theoretically possible. [/quote]
Is answering my question do snowflakes replicate? theoretically possible? Seems unlikely at the moment.

Be a dear and answer the question.[/quote]

First you answer me this. Did Charles Darwin ever have a eureeka moment?

Paul.[/quote]Yes. When Wallace sent him his paper from the South East Asian archipelago.[/quote]

....The trunk of a tree, its branching form, the idea of a common ancestor.

That moment is captured - re-enacted - in "Darwin's Dangerous Idea." I can't find the link, bah.

Paul.
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

thrower For example, he can't show a single instance of anything I've written that can be read as me holding the position that evolution isn't a process. snip

We have established that "evolution is a process"; thanks for clearing that up.

Please explain why you treat NS as analogy?

Paul.
User avatar
romansh
Posts: 3189
Joined: May 01, 2010 9:03 pm
Country: BC Can (in the woods)
Contact:

Re: One bang one process.

Post by romansh »

Hey Paul I see you have still not answered my question "Do snowflakes replicate?"
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
pfrankinstein
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mar 27, 2011 12:42 am
Name: paul
Country: UK

Re: One bang one process.

Post by pfrankinstein »

Let's put an end to the argument. NS stands for "artificial selection." Both mean the same, capsulation interchangeable.

We'd be correcting and updating Charles Darwin by observation.

He was a man trapped in his time. He edged his bet; artificial selection takes the "thinker out of the funker."

We can look at nature without being part of it. His idea was already a dangerous one. the Common ancester.

Human less one for politics of the day.

Primal selection, natural selection, human selection, and then, with the benefit of hindsight, looking forward, artificial selection.

It is an observation: nature was making selection before NS.

Proto plantary disc, Solar systems, stratigraphy, by means of Primal selection. Rafts of evidence.

Paul.
TopCat
Posts: 872
Joined: Dec 24, 2014 5:09 pm
Country: England

Re: One bang one process.

Post by TopCat »

Why are people engaging with this thread? Genuine question. How can anyone at all not have hundreds of things better to do than waste their time on this?

I drop in occasionally to see if Paul ever becomes more coherent, more interested in actual discourse, but every time I'm disappointed.

Honestly, why?
Locked