I think we're getting under someone's skin

fyi takes 6 hits to destroy the think tank.

OMG! I DIED!

What a shame :| Pandas > DI Tank

The pandas do always win.

Inspired by Dembski's "word games" with Dawkins's quotes, and by Dembski's self indulging censorship, I slipped in a comment
here and here.

It pained me to write it. But just ignore the content and read only the capitalized letters.

If this is the guy heading efforts to find evidence of intelligent design, what does it say if he cannot detect my simple yet somewhat hidden intelligent design?

Indeed, the pandas represent the shallowness of ID critics, such as you PZ, who use the same arguments and insult Dembski by calling him Dumbski. It's sad to know that universities are supporting close minded people like you!

Wow, there is more science in this flash game than in most of Dembski's work combined.
Seems that Dembski may have too much time on his hands for his own good...

I don't think I've ever called Dembski "Dumbski".

Indeed, the pandas represent the shallowness of ID critics, such as you PZ, who use the same arguments and insult Dembski by calling him Dumbski. It's sad to know that universities are supporting close minded people like you!

I currently have the high score of 29.

I confess, I have called Dembski "Dumbski." However, anyone who keeps promoting the bilge that Dembski pumps out deserves the moniker.

He may be an idiot, but the game's fun. Got up to 10k before being overwhelmed by the superiority of the pandas. Got to do something to kill time before watching him get Waterloo'd on Comedy Central.

Dumbski! It's still funny!

BillD would dearly love PT'rs to call him D**bski or D******ki or some such thing. That would help him pose as a martyr for the cause of "intellectual freedom", "true science" etc. Unfortunately most scientists haven't heard of this balloon of hot air. The few scientists who have had to "debate" him have turned him inside out and hung him out to dry. The only attention he receives these days is either from creepers and crawlers who bleat the praises of their "dear great leader", or the ones over here who find him an object of unending ridicule. So it looks like some fellow crank or quack passed the meme around about 'evilutionists' calling Dembski = D***ski. That got the quack crowd going once again to defend their 'dear great leader'.

Traffic Demon,

Liar! 29 is the high score and it's MINE! 29 is a prime number. I was on the phone with G. Gonzalez and he told me 29 was a Cosmic Number and that I was a Privileged Planet Person.

You, liar Demon, are not with your non-prime number 10,000.

May pandas infest your dreams!

bill,

10,000 is indeed a prime number. It is a product that can only be obtained by multiplying one by fortyvee, which I just made up. . . . I swear that I had something both intelligible and witty to insert in that mutated ellipsis, but Back in Black just came on, and I got distracted laughing at stupid people. Let's just mutually agree not only that I just used a redundancy, but that 10,000 is prime and that pandas really do look good in tuxedos. I await your humble concession.

Alas, I have been censored. Darn you Dumbski, and your ability to read! : (

But..but...NO FAIR! The pandas keep... evolving!

I'll skip the panda game and stick to the Flying Spaghetti Monster game at
http://www.venganza.org/games/index.htm

"No, we don't have any results. No, we don't even have a research program. By the way, have you seen our video game?"

UPDATE: Paul Myers has just posted at The Panda's Thumb a short note about Panda-Monium titled "I think we're getting under someone's skin" (go here). Presumably he means my skin. Get a life, Paul. No, I'm not upset with you and the members of your select little club. I'm laughing at you. And I will continue to laugh at you.

— Dembski

UPDATE: Paul Myers has just posted at The Panda's Thumb a short note about Panda-Monium titled "I think we're getting under someone's skin" (go here). Presumably he means my skin. Get a life, Paul. No, I'm not upset with you and the members of your select little club. I'm laughing at you. And I will continue to laugh at you.

— William Dembski

I wonder if you can score a 59 or has it been factored out of the game?

And Joseph O'Donnell beats me to it. I even refreshed!

Yes, I win at the internets!!!

From Knowledgenow's very own blaugh, in his own words:

"Lately I've been having these intense fantasies about my new roommates. It's dark and I can't find my bed so I climb into the nearest one. Next thing I know I wake up all wet and sticky. What do you think it means?"

Know your crictics mr Dembski !

UPDATE: Paul Myers has just posted at The Panda's Thumb a short note about Panda-Monium titled "I think we're getting under someone's skin" (go here). Presumably he means my skin. Get a life, Paul. No, I'm not upset with you and the members of your select little club. I'm laughing at you. And I will continue to laugh at you.

There is most definitely a metaphor involved. The fundamentalists (ie. ID'ers) are attempting to create martyrs out of themselves. They can tell the world they are being "persecuted" for their beliefs and thus, justify their intellectually lazy denomination's existence. For them, ID is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's actually quite simple, it's the demise of a false religion. They've been worshiping a false god all their lives and are too conceited to realize it. But, it's up to them to figure it out for themselves. I just wish they'd leave science out of it. The true God of man wants man to pursue science vigorously and to trust that which we discover to be true.! It's no more complicated than that.

Select little club" = ............ the sane/non-Christian fundamentalist parts of the USA,

Why does Dembski bother with pandas. Shouldn't he be clarifying scrotums?

Comment #48153 Posted by anti-darwinist on September 14, 2005 08:46 PM (e) (s) Indeed, the pandas represent the shallowness of ID critics, such as you PZ, who use the same arguments and insult Dembski by calling him Dumbski. It's sad to know that universities are supporting close minded people like you!

Do I know your wife, Moses? Is her name Zipporah?

Oh, and Les...clarified scrota would be an interesting article of courtship display, I would think. A truly honest demonstration that the package ain't empty.

Why does Dembski bother with pandas. Shouldn't he be clarifying scrotums?

UPDATE: Paul Myers has just posted at The Panda's Thumb a short note about Panda-Monium titled "I think we're getting under someone's skin" (go here). Presumably he means my skin. Get a life, Paul. No, I'm not upset with you and the members of your select little club. I'm laughing at you. And I will continue to laugh at you.

— Dembski

Patrick S write: "There is most definitely a metaphor involved. The fundamentalists (ie. ID'ers) are attempting to create martyrs out of themselves. They can tell the world they are being "persecuted" for their beliefs and thus, justify their intellectually lazy denomination's existence. For them, ID is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's actually quite simple, it's the demise of a false religion. They've been worshiping a false god all their lives and are too conceited to realize it. But, it's up to them to figure it out for themselves. I just wish they'd leave science out of it. The true God of man wants man to pursue science vigorously and to trust that which we discover to be true.! It's no more complicated than that."

There's a diatribe of falsehood if I ever saw one. "IDeeerrrs" (strange abbreviation) are not, that's n-o-t, fundamentalists. As IDPs (intelligent Design proponents) come from many different religious and non-religious backgrounds, you would be hard pressed to tell us which religion IDPs are "fundamentalist" about. And, you'd be hard pressed to tell us which "false god" they've been worshipping.

But it is interesting to note that you know exactly what the "true" God wants from us poor humans. Perhaps you could share how you come by that knowledge? Claims of knowing exactly what the "true" God wants of humans sounds pretty fundamentalist to me!!

About the game:

On the title screen, does anyone else think Dembski looks a little like a middle-aged version of this guy in a brand new orange suit?

Shouldn't he look more like this?

Just a thought.

Donald M:
As IDPs (intelligent Design proponents) come from many different religious and non-religious backgrounds, you would be hard pressed to tell us which religion IDPs are "fundamentalist" about. And, you'd be hard pressed to tell us which "false god" they've been worshipping.

OK, I'll bite - I'd be interested to know the names of any PhD-level scientists, especially biologists, who support ID that aren't fairly staunch Christians (and if you name Dawkins I'm just going to start laughing). Certainly, all the ones I've looked up from the classic DI list of 400 scientists have been found to have very specific, and similar, beliefs.

We certainly all know that Dembski and Behe, the poster children for ID (and what an attractive poster that would be), are both Christian. Furthermore, as far as I can see, Dembski and Behe effectively are ID, as they're the only ones that have produced anything that is remotely testable.

There's a diatribe of falsehood if I ever saw one. "IDeeerrrs" (strange abbreviation) are not, that's n-o-t, fundamentalists. As IDPs (intelligent Design proponents) come from many different religious and non-religious backgrounds,

— Donald M

you would be hard pressed to tell us which religion IDPs are "fundamentalist" about. And, you'd be hard pressed to tell us which "false god" they've been worshipping.

Comment #48242 Posted by PZ Myers on September 15, 2005 11:28 AM (e) (s) Do I know your wife, Moses? Is her name Zipporah?

Oh, I answered the second question first. Yes, you know my wife. No, Zipporah isn't her name.

Gee, I only got to 2900. I guess I'll have to convert. Does Dembski have to teach at that Bible College?

I guess that is the Discovery Institute is paying a major chunk of your ticket, you should be attractive to most any school. Well, unless you are a jerk and nobody likes you.

I wouldn't know personally, since nobody ever offered to pay my way. ;-}

I don't think I've ever called Dembski "Dumbski".

Oh, of course I know DS! Tell her "hi" from me, and I hope all is going well.

Re "The pandas keep... evolving!"

Yeah, but they're still pandas! ;)

Henry

"The pandas keep... evolving!"

Ah, but there are no transitional pandas to birds!

You guys are pathetic! Knock it off please. You'll burn in hell for all of those remarks you've made. Soon God will reveal his true self and you will be in awe while descending into hell.

Would you guys leave poor old Bill alone. Why do you continue to defend my case 150 years after my death? Don't you know that my theory is outdated and redundant in most of the scientific literature? For crying out loud, whatever happened to academic freedom? I sometimes wish I never proposed my theory. All I've done is made a religion followed by blind fanatics who constantly extrapolate evidences that isn't there.

Sincerely,
Charlie D.

PS-I think ID makes more sense anyways!

I couldn't agree anymore, Charlie boy!

I couldn't agree anymore, Charlie boy!

Me two!

Me three!

I used the theory of evolution to kill 6 million jews. Thanks Charlie!

LEAVE DARWIN ALONE!!!!!

I reiterate my vote for a registration system here at PT

Is this thread gonna require an exorcism?

Henry

"I used the theory of evolution to kill 6 million jews"

And there I was thinking you used the coercive power of a fascist state with a large industrial base, slave labour and a whole shitload of Zyklon B. Silly me. This "theory of evolution" sounds like powerful stuff. Does the Pentagon know about it?

Did anyone notice that the level three panda had a cross on its chest?
So is the DI now suggesting that they want to kill the Divine Creater or his representaitives?

That just don't seem so Christian Bill.

Bill should laugh after all this select group is only the majority of scientist in the world. What could we know.

OK, I'll bite - I'd be interested to know the names of any PhD-level scientists, especially biologists, who support ID that aren't fairly staunch Christians (and if you name Dawkins I'm just going to start laughing). Certainly, all the ones I've looked up from the classic DI list of 400 scientists have been found to have very specific, and similar, beliefs.

- I can think of one, David Berlinski, who claims that his only religion is "Having a good time."

So that's the secret research program the DI has been doing? A video game? I guess they can cite that in Dover.

No, I hate to say God is wrong, but Berlinski is on record during a debate on Firing Line around 1996 saying he does not support intelligent design. He just seems to have a beef with evolution.

Checking the DI site, it does indeed claim Berlinkski as a "senior fellow", although whether this is an honorary title I do not know. I wonder if Berlinkski comes around to the DI for wine and cigars.

He's also the author of a book on the history and failure of astrology called The Secrets of the Vaulted Sky: perhaps he's hanging around the most popular current pseudo-science so that he can write a new book on ID along similar lines ;) Plus, we all know that Princeton is fairly strong on pseudo-science as a whole lol (I'm thinking of PEAR, here)

And yes, I couldn't find anything describing him as a staunch Christian, so he may well be the token non-religious IDist. On the other hand, he is obviously a mathematician rather than a biologist, but how he hasn't torn Dembski's work apart is beyond me.

Did anyone notice that the level three panda had a cross on its chest?

— sciguy

My god! It's full of pandas!!!

Re: Berlinski:

Get a copy of the tape (correction: it took place in 97, not 96). As I said, it was a Firing Line debate over creationism, with Michael Behe, Phil Johnson, David Berlinski and William Buckley on one side, Kenneth R. Miller, Eugenie Scott, Michael Ruse, and Barry Lynn on the other.

At one point Berlinski is in the hot seat when someone, I can't remember who, says something about "to those who support intelligent design," and Berlinski replies quite clearly, "I don't", even causing the questionaire to say, "Well, to those who do."

I am not claiming this to be an exact transcript, but I have seen the tape many times and think it is quite accurate.

As for being a DI Fellow, yeah, well, pretty soon they'll be getting desperate enough to compile lists of "high school cheerleaders who doubt Darwinism."

At one point Berlinski is in the hot seat when someone, I can't remember who, says something about "to those who support intelligent design," and Berlinski replies quite clearly, "I don't"

— skip

DB: I have no idea. I mean it's not a question I'm prepared to answer one way or another. I don't see why I'm obliged to answer that. I'm coming here under the large tent of objurgation. I find scientific flaws with the Darwinian theory, I don't have a replacement.

Donald M wrote: There's a diatribe of falsehood if I ever saw one. "IDeeerrrs" (strange abbreviation) are not, that's n-o-t, fundamentalists. As IDPs (intelligent Design proponents) come from many different religious and non-religious backgrounds,

Donald M wrote:But it is interesting to note that you know exactly what the "true" God wants from us poor humans. Perhaps you could share how you come by that knowledge? Claims of knowing exactly what the "true" God wants of humans sounds pretty fundamentalist to me!!

Dembski wrote:You guys are pathetic! Knock it off please. You'll burn in hell for all of those remarks you've made. Soon God will reveal his true self and you will be in awe while descending into hell.

Awe, the truth of the matter comes out at last from the horse's mouth! Intelligent Design IS about sneaking fundamentalist christianity into the classroom and coercing students in the public school system to believe as they do. That is no better than Islam! The Islamic religion states that all people must believe as they do. Are you starting to get it yet?

Umm...I think that's someone pretending to be Mr. D... least, I hope so.

The level 1 panda is just a plain ol' panda Level 2 is a panda in a tuxedo - I think a reference to "creationism in a cheap tuxedo" Level 3 is a panda in crusader armor - because "Darwinism" is a religion and the pandas are defending the "faith" Level 4 is a heavily bandaged panda with crutches - because WAD is putting them through the vice, of course. (There is no need for the misspelling of his last name, WAD is accurate on several levels) Level 5 is a panda wearing glasses and has rings or closed hooks for hands (test tube holders?) - not sure what this one is supposed to be, if test tube holders, then it must be a comment on the foolishness of pursuing science in the lab. Level 6 seems to be the same as 5, I've only made it once - the pandas keep winning.

— JAllen

Level 1: "Who designed the designer?"

— Matt Zellman

One other thing for you pandas, if you come to my website and post your evolutionary lies there, I will automatically remove your post and boot you permanently. I am no longer going to play games with you. Leave us alone, please. That's all we ask for.

One other thing for you pandas, if you come to my website and post your evolutionary lies there, I will automatically remove your post and boot you permanently.

I am no longer going to play games with you.

One other thing for you pandas, if you come to my website and post your evolutionary lies there, I will automatically remove your post and boot you permanently. I am no longer going to play games with you. Leave us alone, please. That's all we ask for.

Would I be right in thinking that this is a parody by somebody pretending to be the Isaac Newton of information theory?

If not, then...........

One other thing for you pandas, if you come to my website and post your evolutionary lies there, I will automatically remove your post and boot you permanently. I am no longer going to play games with you. Leave us alone, please. That's all we ask for.

Dr. Dembski,

I would like to let you know that even though I may not be welcome at your blog-site, I would never want to see you booted from The Panda's Thumb. I, for one, always look forward to reading your posts here, no matter how you much you would like to keep folks like me muzzled over at your place.

Sincerely, another devious evilutionist.

One other thing for you pandas, if you come to my website and post your evolutionary lies there, I will automatically remove your post and boot you permanently. I am no longer going to play games with you. Leave us alone, please. That's all we ask for.

— William Dembski

"Level 5 is a panda wearing glasses and has rings or closed hooks for hands (test tube holders?) - not sure what this one is supposed to be, if test tube holders, then it must be a comment on the foolishness of pursuing science in the lab. "

Maybe they're Pirate hooks?

RAmen

Was that really William Dembski? With all the pseudonyms going around, I bet it's not. The ambiguity is a good argument for a registration system.

The IP address from which the "William Dembski" and "Adolph Hitler" posts came has been locked out of the system. It does not correspond to the IP address previously used by William Dembski when posting here.

Re "Maybe they're Pirate hooks?"

Or maybe their thumbs evolved?

Henry

WAD is accurate on several levels

Dembski wrote in his post about the NCSE speaking schedule: Several things things should impress you about this page. First, the number of talks to atheist organizations; second, the number of talks paid for by university biology departments;

2 questions Bill. 1: If ID is truly science and not grounded in religion, who cares to whom and where your opponents speak? Whether an organization is identified by you as "atheist" is immaterial if the substance of the talk is takes no stand on religion and instead focuses on science. 2: What is the problem with university biology departments for a talk that is about advanced biological topics? Again, for topics covering science and not religion, which is the appropriate venue and audience? Would you expect Sycophant Sal to welcome Dr. Scott with open arms and an open mind to this IDEA Club (Christians only)?

I am rather amused by the game. All of the pandas' comments are bloody good points. The panda comments on levels 1 and 5 are good points about how poor the philosophy and "science" (they haven't done any so the scare quotes stand) of ID creationism are. The panda comments on levels 2 and 3 are simple observable facts about ID (observe the recycling of creationist nonsense and that wonderous Wedge document). However, the panda comment on level 4 is the worst one. It's a poor caricature of the point actually being made. The soundbite is inadequate to describe the argument.

My point is this, the intent of the game is obviously to lampoon the comments of thumbites and show Dembski and the DI as an heroic defender in the face of an overwhelming onslaught. The game author's opinion of the onslaught is also clear. However, the irony is that the pandas' comments are actually devastating to ID! What I thought when I saw the game was "what a moron!" simply whoever wrote the game and chose what the pandas were saying doesn't realising how the panda comments expose ID up for what it is.

Ah but it's said so often that creationism is almost indistinguishable from any extreme parody of it. This game shows that not only do these nutballs possess no ability for self examination, but also that irony is yet another alien concept to them.

Re "Is that with "wad" being some obscure (to me) American slang or just the usual soft padding or stuffing?"

The letters "WAD" are Dembski's initials.

Henry

I know that part of it, Henry. What I don't know is what that then means to you (and Dembski) which makes the initials undesirable or amusingly accurate.

I actually enjoyed wasting a couple of minutes playing this game and thought it was, uhm, cute. Seems it could have been created for a ID or pro-evolution web site.

I have a theory (laymans sense of the word) about this game. Maybe its just a tactic by wad in the google wars to ring up more hits for his web site.

wad: Look how the interest in ID has grown! My google scores have soared compared to those the dogmatic evolutionists!

I don't think this is something a pro-science site would stoop to but I would not put it past the (hopefully) dieing ID movement. Now how can I play again without upping his hit count?

Hey! Its just a theory (laymans sense of the word)!

Keep up the good fight!

Skip writes"
At one point Berlinski is in the hot seat when someone, I can't remember who, says something about "to those who support intelligent design," and Berlinski replies quite clearly, "I don't", even causing the questionaire to say, "Well, to those who do."

I am not claiming this to be an exact transcript, but I have seen the tape many times and think it is quite accurate."

However, I do have the official transcript, I ordered it.

Ken Miller made the statement "to those who support intelligent design" to which Berlinski indeed chimed in "I don't"

For those who have a copy of the transcript, the exchange occurse just beofre the end.

SEF,

If you're not prudish, see entry 1 of the Urban Dictionary definition of "wad".

I believe this is what JAllen means when he/she says "WAD" is "accurate on several levels".

Has anyone mentioned SPORE? The evolution game coming out for Xbox-360 by the makers of The Sims.

http://spore.ea.com

Phil P