tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post116500789195477749..comments2023-05-14T05:58:07.794-07:00Comments on Languedoc Diary: A neutral venue: John Davison, this is for youAlan Foxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comBlogger403125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-26928655878242271672007-03-18T17:15:00.000-07:002007-03-18T17:15:00.000-07:00this report is fantastic, the infomation you show ...this report is fantastic, the infomation you show us is really interesting and is good written. Do you want to see something more? Look: this is a good page, you can visit too:<A HREF="http://www.headshopinternational.com/" REL="nofollow"></A>Head Shop, <A HREF="http://www.headshopinternational.com/" REL="nofollow">Herbal Grinders</A> <BR/> <A HREF="http://www.headshopinternational.com/" REL="nofollow">Bongs</A>, <A HREF="http://www.headshopinternational.com/" REL="nofollow">Glass Pipe</A>. Visit us for more info at: <A HREF="http://www.headshopinternational.com/" REL="nofollow">http://www.headshopinternational.com/</A>Omar Cruzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02944147038071391777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-69144574530260307872007-01-16T15:09:00.000-08:002007-01-16T15:09:00.000-08:00John, all that means is you got a good review from...John, all that means is you got a good review from someone who's gone on record as saying that "the theory of creation from Christ's body satisfies rational requirements". Sure you want to <b>brag</b> about that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168516104969395992007-01-11T03:48:00.000-08:002007-01-11T03:48:00.000-08:00I see that I am once again permitted to hold forth...I see that I am once again permitted to hold forth. I recommend that all visit the January 10 edition of American Chronicle where Kazmer Ujvarosy introduced my essay "The Darwinain Delusion" as an antidote to Dickie Dawkins' "The God Delusion."<BR/><BR/>Enjoy!<BR/><BR/>I love it so!<BR/><BR/>"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168239649023215672007-01-07T23:00:00.000-08:002007-01-07T23:00:00.000-08:00John,I dont know what the bbs is. You have mention...John,<BR/><BR/>I dont know what the bbs is. You have mentioned it in the first post of this interesting experiment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168207384797286042007-01-07T14:03:00.000-08:002007-01-07T14:03:00.000-08:00Please transmit this message for me. I want to wat...<I>Please transmit this message for me. I want to watch the reaction.Thank you very much.</I><BR/><BR/>Somebody will soon notice if you have anything new or interesting to say, John.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168207242449548992007-01-07T14:00:00.000-08:002007-01-07T14:00:00.000-08:00John and Martin This thread is getting rather long...John and Martin <BR/><BR/>This thread is getting rather long. John has said he is not interested in initiating a thread, so, perhaps Martin would like to. You could, for instance, develop your theory of butterfly mimcry, or any other subject you prefer. If you email me the text, I will post it as a thread subject.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168204050273147092007-01-07T13:07:00.000-08:002007-01-07T13:07:00.000-08:00Would you please remind your cronies over at the S...Would you please remind your cronies over at the Slippery Floor Saloon that none of the following ever had anything whatever to do with any aspect of the evolutionary scenario beyond the establishment of intraspecific varieties or subspecies, none of which are incipient species anyway.<BR/>1. Chance.<BR/>2. Selection, natural or artificial.<BR/>3. Sexual reproduction.<BR/>4. Mendelian Genetics.<BR/>5. Population Genetics.<BR/>6. Founder effect.<BR/>7. Allelic mutations.<BR/>8. Time constants greater than minutes.<BR/><BR/>Please transmit this message for me. I want to watch the reaction.Thank you very much.<BR/><BR/>"A past evolution undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168202692246573682007-01-07T12:44:00.000-08:002007-01-07T12:44:00.000-08:00MartinI already described the pet toad that I used...Martin<BR/><BR/>I already described the pet toad that I used to roll bbs at in lecture. He would lap them up until he couldn't move. Then I would take him by the hindlegs, hold him head down and shake the bbs out again. He would then repeat the performance. <BR/><BR/>The Darwimps see adaptation everywhere when it may not even exist. The patterns of butterflies may be only for self recognition or may even have no significance whatsover, although I suspect the former.<BR/><BR/>Why do otters love to spend hours mud sliding? What is its adaptive significance? Isn't it obvious that they are just having fun? Aren't squirrels just having fun chasing one another around? My goldfish do the same thing. Darwimps are such jerks don't you know.<BR/><BR/>"Animals are not always struggling for existence. Most of the time they are sitting around doing nothing at all."<BR/>anonymous<BR/><BR/>A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168190066649962692007-01-07T09:14:00.000-08:002007-01-07T09:14:00.000-08:00AlanThe list of butterfly predators is long. Suffi...Alan<BR/><I><BR/>The list of butterfly predators is long. Suffice it to mention just ants, spiders, wasps, parasitic wasps, parasitic flies, birds, rats, toads, lizards, praying mantis, snakes and monkeys." I suspect all these predators use visual information when catching prey. (Orb-web spiders must be an exception, I guess.) <BR/></I><BR/><BR/>This list is a curious one. I have never heard about rats preying butterflies on the meadow. I am also not convinced that snakes whose eyes are able detect mainly movement will appreciate perfect mimicry of some butterfly species resting on the ground. Same for the wasps - btw range of vision of mentioned species go from infra red (wasps) to ultraviolet (birds). We should not forget that wings of butterflies are closed when butterfles rest (unlike moths) and bottom side of them are unconspicuous.<BR/><BR/>And if toads can even distinguish between palatable, unpalatable and mimic species is very dubious on my opinion.<BR/><BR/>In one of your post you put link that proved inefficiency of eye spots of butterflies against predators.<BR/><BR/>So we can seen that darwinistic explanation of mimicry has more to do with blind belief of omnipotence of selection as with real knowledge of evolution forces behind it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168166473614419672007-01-07T02:41:00.000-08:002007-01-07T02:41:00.000-08:00It is hard to believe isn't it?It is hard to believe isn't it?JohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168162930507336922007-01-07T01:42:00.000-08:002007-01-07T01:42:00.000-08:00359. John A. Davison Says: January 6th, 2007...359. John A. Davison Says:<BR/> January 6th, 2007 at 3:27 pm |<BR/><BR/> That cowardly, uneducated twerp Alan Fox has now made it impossible for me to post at the very thread he set up just for me - "John Davison, this is for you."<BR/><BR/> How low can a Darwimp stoop?<BR/><BR/> It is hard to believe isn't it?<BR/><BR/> I love it so!<BR/><BR/> "A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/> John A. Davison<BR/><BR/> Comment by John A. Davison — January 6, 2007 @ 3:27 pm<BR/> 360. John A. Davison Says:<BR/> January 6th, 2007 at 4:37 pm |<BR/><BR/> That cowardly little twerp Fox has now made it impossible for me to post at the thread he presented just for me - "John Davison, this is for you."<BR/><BR/> How low can that Darwimpian creep stoop?<BR/><BR/> It is hard to believe isn't it?<BR/><BR/> Not for me it isn't.<BR/><BR/> I love it so!'<BR/><BR/> "A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/> John A. Davison<BR/><BR/> Comment by John A. Davison — January 6, 2007 @ 4:37 pm<BR/><BR/> Telic Thoughts is proudly powered by WordPress <BR/><BR/><B>How many more times do I need to say this John. I am not blocking you. I have never blocked you. I will never* block you.</B><BR/><BR/>*usual caveats apply.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168124277066537962007-01-06T14:57:00.000-08:002007-01-06T14:57:00.000-08:00Falan Ox you miserable little two-faced hypocrite....Falan Ox you miserable little two-faced hypocrite. You kept me from posting all day long and only relented when I exposed you once more at "brainstorms." How many times did I have to do that? I can't remember.<BR/><BR/>Do yourself a favor and close this blog down. You are an embarrassment to yourself, your moronic cronies at Welsberry's Last Stand and most of all to your family. Martin has exposed the whole rotten lot of you as intellectual trailer trash, subnormal masochistic losers and the dregs of a dead hypothesis. Darwimpianism isn't even an hypothesis because it makes no predictions. "Random walks" are not predictable don't you know. I gave you every opportunity to rescue yourself from yourself and you turned me down flat. Now live with it for the rest of your useless life you degenerate creep. Now go right ahead and deny that the blocked message didn't descend on me for the umteenth time. I'm fed up with your hypocrisy and mendacity.<BR/><BR/>Imagine folks, if you can, a thread specifically for me on which I cannot contribute without having to expose its sponsor every time he blocks me. Isn't that the bottom of the barrel? Of course it is!<BR/><BR/>It is no wonder that -<BR/><BR/>I love it so!<BR/><BR/>It is hard to believe isn't it?<BR/><BR/>"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168045880812779002007-01-05T17:11:00.000-08:002007-01-05T17:11:00.000-08:00Your claim would be supported if you could find sc...Your claim would be supported if you could find scientific articles giving different explanations for the antibiotic effect of penicillin. Your claim would be well supported if these articles occurred as often as you change your socks.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168045573968940312007-01-05T17:06:00.000-08:002007-01-05T17:06:00.000-08:00You originally claimed theories of how penicillin ...You originally claimed theories of how penicillin works have come and gone rapidly. A translated remark from a Czech radio program is hardly supporting evidence for your claim.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168043523738762012007-01-05T16:32:00.000-08:002007-01-05T16:32:00.000-08:00Is penicillin not antibiotic any more?Is penicillin not antibiotic any more?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168038016683486972007-01-05T15:00:00.000-08:002007-01-05T15:00:00.000-08:00"Mechanisms of effects of antiboitics, analogs and..."Mechanisms of effects of antiboitics, analogs and neurotransmiters have changed many times and typical effects show that moleculars mechanisms and models in vitro probably are not the explanation of it in therapeutic outcomes."<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, I do not understand Czech. You originally claimed theories of how penicillin works have come and gone rapidly. I point out that the action of penicillin is well understood. Your latest translated statement does not seem to support your claim.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168037068650318902007-01-05T14:44:00.000-08:002007-01-05T14:44:00.000-08:00Have a look on Neubauer research published all aro...Have a look on Neubauer research published all around the world in prominent scientific sources. <BR/><A HREF="http://www.vhled.cz/Casopis_Vhled(cislo3)/Vstupni_stranka/Uplna_bibliografie/Uplna_bibliografie.html" REL="nofollow">Neubauer works</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168036308366852912007-01-05T14:31:00.000-08:002007-01-05T14:31:00.000-08:00Neubauer vs. neodarwinian supporter scientist Gryg...Neubauer vs. neodarwinian supporter scientist Grygar in Czech state radio:<BR/><I><BR/>Mechanismy účinku, antibiotik nebo analogů, neurotransmitorů se už mnohokrát měnily a typické účinky ukazují, že asi vo ty molekulární mechanismy a vo ty modely in vitro pravděpodobně v terapeutických účincích i alopatických léků vůbec nejde. <BR/></I><BR/>http://www.phil.muni.cz/fil/ruzne/grygarvsneubauer.html<BR/><BR/>my poor translation:<BR/>"Mechanisms of effects of antiboitics, analogs and neurotransmiters have changed many times and typical effects show that moleculars mechanisms and models in vitro probably are not the explanation of it in therapeutic outcomes."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168035370650862632007-01-05T14:16:00.000-08:002007-01-05T14:16:00.000-08:00VMartin wrote:Theories trying to clearly explain p...VMartin wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>Theories trying to clearly explain penicilline effects changes like my socks every day. Whats the latest one?</I><BR/><BR/>On the contrary, the action of penicillin on gram-positive bacteria seems well understood, preventing the cross-linking of peptidoglycan (the main cell wall component) making them susceptible to lysis.Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168034173800095582007-01-05T13:56:00.000-08:002007-01-05T13:56:00.000-08:00Alan cited:Studies of the resultant line of resist...Alan cited:<BR/><I><BR/>Studies of the resultant line of resistant bacteria show modifications of the gene that codes for the production<BR/>of the cell-wall component normally interfered with by<BR/>penicillin.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>As far as I know from professor Neubauer there is still no clear scientific explanation how penicillin function or take effect. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Theories trying to clearly explain penicilline effects changes like my socks every day. Whats the latest one?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168033080373157822007-01-05T13:38:00.000-08:002007-01-05T13:38:00.000-08:00John:I am engaged in a war with the Darwinians and...John:<BR/><I><BR/>I am engaged in a war with the Darwinians and the Fundamentalists alike. They are both dead wrong. <BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Anyway that does not mean that idea you represents should be denigrated by them. At least you influenced me very.<BR/><BR/>It was Konfucius opinion: when all dismiss any person be carefull. Do not agree with them and do not agree with them when they celebrate somebody too. But think deeply whats the reason of it instead.<BR/><BR/>It was also fate one of the greatest philosoph of modern era from 19 century Soren Kierkegaard -he was openly ridiculed and denigrated on streets of Kodane by mobs.<BR/><BR/>And yet you are not alone. There are many anti-darwinist scientists neglected by science community nowadays. These great men dismissed darwinism and yet nobody can prove them to be wrong. I cited German contemporary scientist Suchantke and prominent Czech biologist professor of Charles University Neubauer. He turned to be antidarwinist and he create his own conception of evolution based on Goethes and Nietzsches legacy. <BR/><BR/>Your Manifesto continued in best tradition of independent scientific thinking and it gives lot of interesting facts and ideas for persons who need some explanations of forces behind evolution process in era of neo-darwinism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168032809177726972007-01-05T13:33:00.000-08:002007-01-05T13:33:00.000-08:00I you're bored, you could have a go at answering M...I you're bored, you could have a go at answering <A HREF="http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2007/01/stupidity_from_our_old_friend.php#comment-307238" REL="nofollow">Mark Chu-Carroll's questions</A><BR/><BR/><I>John Davidson:<BR/><BR/>How about some *evidence* for any of that? That's an argument that I've heard numerous times before, but I've yet to see anyone actually *defend it* by showing actual evidence.<BR/><BR/>It's easy to talk and claim something like that, but it's a whole lot harder to actual turn that claim into a real scientific argument.<BR/><BR/>Just for example: there are a number of places where we've observed new genes, or new mutations of old genes - that is,<BR/>information or structure in the genes that is demonstrably<BR/>new.<BR/><BR/>For example, we've seen bacteria formed from a single clone<BR/>line develop penicillin resistance by way of a modified<BR/>cell-wall production pathway; that capability was *not* in the original genes of the bacteria that formed the cell line; but it wound up being produced after prolonged exposure to penicillin with clavulanic acid. (Clavulanic acid blocks the actions of penicillinase, which is the common mode of penicillin resistance.)<BR/><BR/>Studies of the resultant line of resistant bacteria show modifications of the gene that codes for the production<BR/>of the cell-wall component normally interfered with by<BR/>penicillin. That is, we can sequence the specific genes of a normal bacterial strain, and the same genes in a resistant<BR/>strain, and identify the differences. That difference was *not* originally in the gene; and it is not the case that<BR/>an old gene was switched off and a new one switched on - it's the same gene, but modified. How can you explain that in terms of your theory?</I>Alan Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16470368958109056177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1168030985101130092007-01-05T13:03:00.000-08:002007-01-05T13:03:00.000-08:00I'm bored."A past evolution is undeniable, a prese...I'm bored.<BR/><BR/>"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable"<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1167943048568945002007-01-04T12:37:00.000-08:002007-01-04T12:37:00.000-08:00Why would I want to introduce a topic here? I am h...Why would I want to introduce a topic here? I am here for one purpose only which is to expose Darwinism for what it has always been, a fiction, a lie, a hoax and a blight upon the face of reason.<BR/><BR/>I am engaged in a war with the Darwinians and the Fundamentalists alike. They are both dead wrong. Let me quote General George S. Patton -<BR/><BR/>"God help me, I do love it so. I love it more than my life.....I am going to be allowed to fulfill my destiny."<BR/><BR/>My destiny is to resurrrect my sources from the oblivion you cowardly,"prescribed" atheists have cynically and deliberately tried to bury them. You have gotten away with it far too long. You are all through, finished and like the Ether of Physics and the Phlogiston of Chemistry it is now Godless Darwinism that has become nothing but a pathetic footnote in the history of biological science. That is all that it ever was!<BR/><BR/>I love it so!<BR/><BR/>"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."<BR/>John A. DavisonJohnADavisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13273254635432654886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23603046.post-1167935564312501992007-01-04T10:32:00.000-08:002007-01-04T10:32:00.000-08:00There is also an interesting case of Samurai crab ...There is also an interesting case of Samurai crab that resembles samurais.<BR/><BR/>http://www.docbug.com/blog/archives/000701.html<BR/><BR/>Fisher tried to explain such resemblance by selection performed by fishermen!<BR/><BR/>So selection must be whatever it cost.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com