You’re so right, begbert, I’m sorry. That was truly a foolish assumption for me to have made.
All the NPs I know are much smarter than ivn. Please don’t impugn their honor like that.
I thought it was obvious that **ivn **is attending Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
What grade are you getting in Dembski’s class, ivn?
This thread is dying down.
Quick ivn, say something stupid, ignorant, smarmy and pretentious.
… go!
Maybe he got his 2000 words in. Anyone keeping count?
I actually support the idea.
I think intelligent design is stupid, but I like the idea of testing your ideas in hostile territory.
Most people just hang around with people that agree with them. That’s easy, and stupid. It’s like being in school and joining up with ten other kids to beat up an eleventh. I even think it’s cowardly.
You gotta fight where there’s adversaries.
You don’t know much about the scientific community. Disagreement is the norm. It’s the Discovery Instutute that requires that it’s members literally swear an oath to never disagree.
Nobody is stopping IDers from submitting their ideas for peer review. They just don’t seem to want to do it.
Except they’re not fighting, or even debating - they’re basically just being told to troll/threadshit and then bail, which is even more cowardly.
Sure I do. You don’t seem to understand that their is a context for testing ideas outside of the scientific community, and that’s what I was referring to.
If I think a Mac is better than a PC, and want to test my idea against others where in the scientific community should I submit the idea for peer review? :rolleyes:
There’s a chance they might learn something and it gives us good target practice.
What’s the problem?
Not for scientific hypotheses there isn’t.
“Better” for what? What exactly is your hypothesis?
I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. Exactly what tests are you saying IDists should perform?
ETA. maybe I misunderstood you. Are you saying that you welcome them trying to show up and argue their points to a “hostile” audience rather than just jerking each other off? In that case I agree with you.
If the requirement was to counter the best 8 responses or something, and submit the entire thread that would be good - but you know and I know these kids are going to get their asses handed to them. The requirement is for write-only participation with nothing about evaluating the quality of the arguments against. Do you think these kids have any idea of what evolution actually says?
And I don’t understand your Mac vs PC comment either. How people feel about the color of the cover of a journal doesn’t get peer reviewed.
If you are doing research in user interfaces, and you’ve done a study comparing the interfaces with regard to response time, mistakes made, and number of actions to perform a function, you definitely could submit this for peer review - and I’d be surprised if there weren’t a bunch of articles out there in human factors journals. Is that what you mean?
I’m gonna guess **A **for Ass-Lickin’ Good.