The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Share your thoughts on the written word.
User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19764
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:10 pm

kennyc wrote:
Winfield wrote:.... I do science, you don't.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

Today's Arrogance Award goes to Winfield.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 12:52 am

Poodle wrote:( More Music) ...

Edgar's in trouble - if only he'd given us that definition of time he promised, maybe he'd have time here, but he's in the corner again, claiming arcane knowledge that only he knows.

Bad move, Edgar!

(Music) ...

I don't keep my discoveries in secret. I've written them in books so that the world could see - if they only interested to know. Interested people buy the books based on my experience.

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 12:54 am

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
kennyc wrote:
Winfield wrote:.... I do science, you don't.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

Today's Arrogance Award goes to Winfield.

Is it arrogance to say and claim that you have new discoveries that you can defend? I think not. You said that because you still don't know what I've claimed as written in all of my books

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 12:58 am

octopus1 wrote:
Winfield wrote:The theory of evolution is not my own theory. I'm aware of competing theories, none of which worth anything beyond a chuckle (as far as I'm concerned); None of which involve butchering African wild game on video, either. I try to avoid the sight of blood as often as I can, squeamish you see...

It is not unreasonable to suggest that in reading your book, I would be at risk of becoming even further "mis-informed"[sic].

What's really shocked me is that you are yourself a scientist. And you've squandered your integrity on something which honestly makes no sense. It doesn't even matter if, for some mad reason, you're correct - You've ruined your credibility by continuing to pander a theory (for profit!), which has been roundly criticized, and then failing to defend yourself adequately.

Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:12 am

It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:21 am

SweetPea wrote:It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.

You need to remember that our current biological science deleted "intelligence" in all explanations in biology. That means, no categorization process is happening in biological world, which means that a DIRTDIDIT explanation is possible, without any intelligent agent.

Since your experiment has "intelligent agent" then, it is automatically disqualified.

For example, is it true that a DIRTDIDIT or AIRDIDIT or WEATHERDIDIT had caused the evolution of finches in Galapagos island?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19764
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:22 am

Winfield wrote:I don't keep my discoveries in secret.

No, please do.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:24 am

Winfield wrote: I don't keep my discoveries in secret. I've written them in books so that the world could see - if they only interested to know. Interested people buy the books based on my experience.
This is a science forum not a personal experience forum.

Two other theists have currently presented their "theories" for us to review. Other theists have asked us to pay to read their books and we said "No thank you" as it is to expensive and we can't quote copyrighted works at length.

You are not prepared to present your theory. The matter ends there.

If your aim is to make money from self publishing, your target market should be the David Icke forum rather than science and skeptic forums. Considering that five years ago you thought "noses wandered around the face due to mutation" suggests you haven't got a clue about basic biology or science.

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:30 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Winfield wrote: I don't keep my discoveries in secret. I've written them in books so that the world could see - if they only interested to know. Interested people buy the books based on my experience.
This is a science forum not a personal experience forum.

Two other theists have currently presented their "theories" for us to review. Other theists have asked us to pay to read their books and we said "No thank you" as it is to expensive and we can't quote copyrighted works at length.

You are not prepared to present your theory. The matter ends there.

If your aim is to make money from self publishing, your target market should be the David Icke forum rather than science and skeptic forums. Considering that five years ago you thought "noses wandered around the face due to mutation" suggests you haven't got a clue about basic biology or science.
I am not asking you to buy my science books. I posted an OP to tell you that the old topics in science had a already been replaced.

Empirical is experience if it could be shown in science. That is actually behavioral science.

You have never yet read my books, thus, I considered you as an arrogant/deluded of judging a scientist who had discovered many things while you don't have any.

Scientists got a mistakes but they admitted them. It is like me. We are now in a new generation science. Let us goodbye to the old one that don't work.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:41 am

Winfield wrote:Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.
Why? It's complete nonsense. It's religious crap.

Chapter 11 : "Jesus Christ : The Candidate for Intelligent Agent in Science" (sic)

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:45 am

Winfield wrote:You have never yet read my books, thus, I considered you as an arrogant/deluded of judging a scientist who had discovered many things while you don't have any.
You are just another nutty religious person trying to flog a book for money. You never offered your book to anyone for peer review before publishing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

Go waste the time of a religious forum and leave us alone.

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:50 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Winfield wrote:Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.
Why? It's complete nonsense. It's religious crap.

Chapter 11 : "Jesus Christ : The Candidate for Intelligent Agent in Science" (sic)


I said "candidate". You can use stone or air or dirt as candidates. But you need to show it through naturalistic science. Write a book so that I could buy and see. Let us compare who is a pseudo-scientist.

I know that you are so afraid to read the books since, oh my goodness, you will surely know that your old explanations in science are all wrong.

Well, if that is how you feed your intellectual mind, then, so be it. But you cannot change the fact that new discoveries are now in circulation/publication.

Cheer for me! Lol!

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:55 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Winfield wrote:You have never yet read my books, thus, I considered you as an arrogant/deluded of judging a scientist who had discovered many things while you don't have any.
You are just another nutty religious person trying to flog a book for money. You never offered your book to anyone for peer review before publishing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

Go waste the time of a religious forum and leave us alone.


Peer-review? Does the peer reviewer knew the real definition of intelligence? Does the peer-reviewer has a presupposition that anything that has "intelligence" on it is not science?

No, let the book speaks for itself and let the future peer-reviewer learns first the new discoveries. I am not their peer, I am their adversary. You know what I mean.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:59 am

Winfield wrote:I said "candidate". You can use stone or air or dirt as candidates
Why would I use any? I don't know your theory, I'm not interested and there is no "Jesus Christ".

Winfield wrote:I know that you are so afraid to read the books since, oh my goodness, you will surely know that your old explanations in science are all wrong.
I read the theories presented on this forum. You have not presented your theory. There is nothing for me to be frighted of.

Winfield wrote:Cheer for me! Lol!
Well actually, it is "cheers" to the firm who charges all you crazy theists to self publish. Here is the self published book of the person before you who asked us to buy his book. We didn't buy his either.
http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Planets-Ev ... of+planets

Note how he never got a review either.

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:13 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Winfield wrote:I said "candidate". You can use stone or air or dirt as candidates
Why would I use any? I don't know your theory, I'm not interested and there is no "Jesus Christ".

Winfield wrote:I know that you are so afraid to read the books since, oh my goodness, you will surely know that your old explanations in science are all wrong.
I read the theories presented on this forum. You have not presented your theory. There is nothing for me to be frighted of.

Winfield wrote:Cheer for me! Lol!
Well actually, it is "cheers" to the firm who charges all you crazy theists to self publish. Here is the self published book of the person before you who asked us to buy his book. We didn't buy his either.
http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Planets-Ev ... of+planets

Note how he never got a review either.
It is not science since I did not even see any experiment that I could test and it is not simple. My book, "The New Intelligent Design <id>, Turning the Scientific World Upside Down" had detailed how I discovered it, that even a high school students could understand.

My discovery is simple and so obvious. It said that we can differentiate any X in the entire universe in the topic of origin, between intelligently designed object (intellen) and naturally made object (naturen) - just like we can differentiate a drawing made by a 4 years old boy to his father. It is simple but I think you don't know how to use it scientifically. Do you wanna try here?

I understand your lamentation about some erroneous science. I do, too. But, I said that if you just only used science of categorization of all X in the entire universe in the topic of origin, you will end up agreeing with me since nature cannot lie to us. Nature has pattern just like Made in China or Made in Japan has pattern. And I discovered that patterns.

In addition, I don't know about his credentials. I was a scholar - it is one of my many credentials.

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:30 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.

You need to remember that our current biological science deleted "intelligence" in all explanations in biology. That means, no categorization process is happening in biological world, which means that a DIRTDIDIT explanation is possible, without any intelligent agent.


You want to use definitions both ways. Why did you challenge for an experiment? You scoffed, and then when an experiment that kills your {!#%@} was presented, you "automatically disqualify" it under this definition or the other.


You deserve "terrible crap, dishonest sales pitch" as review comment. If it was worth anyone's time to give a review comment. They'd have to be pretty desperate to buy that book in the first place.


Loooooooooooser.
Last edited by SweetPea on Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:34 am

SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.

You need to remember that our current biological science deleted "intelligence" in all explanations in biology. That means, no categorization process is happening in biological world, which means that a DIRTDIDIT explanation is possible, without any intelligent agent.
Then dirt did the experiment, have it your way.

You want to use definitions both ways. Why did you challenge for an experiment? You scoffed, and then when an experiment that kills your {!#%@} was presented, you "automatically disqualify" it under this definition or the other.
That's showing dishonesty.
You cannot use intelligence as your argument or defense! You must be against "intelligence", so stop using intelligent agent in experiment.

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:38 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.

You need to remember that our current biological science deleted "intelligence" in all explanations in biology. That means, no categorization process is happening in biological world, which means that a DIRTDIDIT explanation is possible, without any intelligent agent.
Then dirt did the experiment, have it your way.

You want to use definitions both ways. Why did you challenge for an experiment? You scoffed, and then when an experiment that kills your {!#%@} was presented, you "automatically disqualify" it under this definition or the other.
That's showing dishonesty.
You cannot use intelligence as your argument or defense! You must be against "intelligence", so stop using intelligent agent in experiment.


It was not an argument I presented. It was only my opinion of the scientist. You're full of {!#%@}. another opinion.

I was done presenting on the experiment you challenged about, with no mention of intelligence. None. NO mention.

Then for the sole purpose of using your ruse, you asked my opinion about the scientist.
That has nothing to do with the experiment or the result.

You couldn't reply about your challenge, so you resort to this. Very poor stuff, Edgar.

You're a charlatan. And a stinky one. Loooooooser.
Last edited by SweetPea on Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:43 am

SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It's a riot.

Your response is that if an experiment - which more than meets your challenge - was conducted by a intelligent being, then that means all bets are off. Why then did you challenge to see an experiment?
What kind of experiment were you looking for? One not done by an intelligent being?

Don't you see the humour in that? I don't think it's lost on anyone else.

You need to remember that our current biological science deleted "intelligence" in all explanations in biology. That means, no categorization process is happening in biological world, which means that a DIRTDIDIT explanation is possible, without any intelligent agent.


It was not an argument I presented. It was only my opinion of the scientist. You're full of {!#%@}. another opinion.

I was done presenting on the experiment you challenged about, with no mention of intelligence. None. NO mention.

Then for the sole purpose of using your ruse, you asked my opinion about the scientist.
That has nothing to do with the experiment or the result.
You are negating the topic. You don't know the problems or weaknesses of ToE! ToE must never use intelligence nor its scientists, is that fair?

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:48 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It was not an argument I presented. It was only my opinion of the scientist. You're full of {!#%@}. another opinion.

I was done presenting on the experiment you challenged about, with no mention of intelligence. None. NO mention.

Then for the sole purpose of using your ruse, you asked my opinion about the scientist.
That has nothing to do with the experiment or the result.
You are negating the topic. You don't know the problems or weaknesses of ToE! ToE must never use intelligence nor its scientists, is that fair?
No it's not fair. Experiments are not the person. Most often written not in first person.


Loooooser!
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:50 am

The experiment had nothing to do with intelligence.

That's why you could not reply.

You are a cheat.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:53 am

SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It was not an argument I presented. It was only my opinion of the scientist. You're full of {!#%@}. another opinion.

I was done presenting on the experiment you challenged about, with no mention of intelligence. None. NO mention.

Then for the sole purpose of using your ruse, you asked my opinion about the scientist.
That has nothing to do with the experiment or the result.
You are negating the topic. You don't know the problems or weaknesses of ToE! ToE must never use intelligence nor its scientists, is that fair?
No it's not fair. Experiments are not the person. Most often written not in first person.


Loooooser!
What??

Are you crazy?? Anybody can make an experiment with no intelligence since ToE's scientists had concluded that "intelligence" is not part in biology. So, why are you violating that premise?

You cannot just grab anything that you think correct, you must stick to the rules! If TOE said that "no-intelligence allowed", then, so be it. Then why are you violating your own rules??
And you are debating with me???


Crazy! Lol!!!!!!! Darwin had made you not only insane but moron!

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:57 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:
Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:It was not an argument I presented. It was only my opinion of the scientist. You're full of {!#%@}. another opinion.

I was done presenting on the experiment you challenged about, with no mention of intelligence. None. NO mention.

Then for the sole purpose of using your ruse, you asked my opinion about the scientist.
That has nothing to do with the experiment or the result.
You are negating the topic. You don't know the problems or weaknesses of ToE! ToE must never use intelligence nor its scientists, is that fair?
No it's not fair. Experiments are not the person. Most often written not in first person.


Loooooser!
What??

Are you crazy?? Anybody can make an experiment with no intelligence since ToE's scientists had concluded that "intelligence" is not part in biology. So, why are you violating that premise?
I'm not.


You cannot just grab anything that you think correct, you must stick to the rules!


I am.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:58 am

I'm equally happy to say dirt did the experiment.

You loooooose. You cannot say there was no experiment.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:04 am

SweetPea wrote:I'm equally happy to say dirt did the experiment.

You loooooose. You cannot say there was no experiment.
Lol!!!

It's the end of your intellectual mind. You had just wasted your education in schools!

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:05 am

You'll of course provide the precise quote where ToE says no intelligence allowed.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:07 am

SweetPea wrote:You'll of course provide the precise quote where ToE says no intelligence allowed.
Thank you. You are the one who said that I knew my enemy and I know how to win.

But you, you don't know your enemy, so you will never win!

Who's to blame for that? Darwin, of course!

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:19 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:You'll of course provide the precise quote where ToE says no intelligence allowed.
Thank you. You are the one who said that I knew my enemy and I know how to win.

But you, you don't know your enemy, so you will never win!

Who's to blame for that? Darwin, of course!


Provide the quote that says no intelligence allowed. You can do that, can't you? You weren't lying were you?
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:20 am

Provide this quote as well.
You are the one who said that I knew my enemy and I know how to win.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:38 am

Winfield wrote: you don't know your enemy, so you will never win!

You are a bit mad. A theory, such as the theory of evolution, is not an enemy or friend. It is simply a theory that stands or falls according to the facts.

You are giving "theories" anthropomorphic qualities by giving them human characteristics. That is just another indicator that you don't have a clue and that you are a bit backwards and think that normal physics has to have some magical human qualities. This is why you are an amusing left over, a legacy from the dark ages, a christian who believes in bronze age Jewish messiahs.

You can go away now.

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 4:13 am

Winfield wrote:
SweetPea wrote:You'll of course provide the precise quote where ToE says no intelligence allowed.
Thank you. You are the one who said that I knew my enemy and I know how to win.


Here's what I said
It's important to understand some of the mechanisms involved in evolution. Darwin did not have as much information as came later, so he just had general ideas.

See if you can say what an allele is. In order to make progress, you should understand what you are opposing.
I said you should try. I didn't say anything like what you claim.

You said
As a scientist, I rely in experiment since there are many liars today...I need to confirm and test or I would not believe.
I gave you the experiment.
You did not reply. Then you came up with an excuse about intelligence, which has nothing to do with the experiment showing ToE is a good explanation.

Show where ToE says no intelligence allowed. You can't. It doesn't.
Last edited by SweetPea on Thu Dec 19, 2013 6:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26755
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Dec 19, 2013 5:28 am

Winfield wrote:You had just wasted your education in schools!
I just read through the free sections of all your books. You don't know what a "species" is.
:D

Even more entertainingly, you have simply copied entire paragraphs from one book into all the others and given the books different names.

You have used a spell checker but didn't get anyone to proof read your work, so the same awful grammar and typos appear in the same paragraphs in all the books simultaneously.

You have been conned by a "Vanity Publisher" ( pay to publish) who has taken your money and told you to "seek controversy" by posting links to your books on a science forum. That is why you and the ten or so other "self published science authors" before you, have linked their books here, so as to generate "controversy". (We ignored them like we ignored your book)

How much did you pay to get your seven books "published"? $US 800? $US 1,600?

You've lost your money mate. You've been conned.

User avatar
SweetPea
Has No Life
Posts: 12885
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:11 am
Custom Title: Too Cute

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby SweetPea » Thu Dec 19, 2013 5:44 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Winfield wrote:You had just wasted your education in schools!
I just read through the free sections of all your books. You don't know what a "species" is.
:D

Even more entertainingly, you have simply copied entire paragraphs from one book into all the others and given the books different names.

You have used a spell checker but didn't get anyone to proof read your work, so the same awful grammar and typos appear in the same paragraphs in all the books simultaneously.

You have been conned by a "Vanity Publisher" ( pay to publish) who has taken your money and told you to "seek controversy" by posting links to your books on a science forum. That is why you and the ten or so other "self published science authors" before you, have linked their books here, so as to generate "controversy". (We ignored them like we ignored your book)

How much did you pay to get your seven books "published"? $US 800? $US 1,600?

You've lost your money mate. You've been conned.

Self-plagiarism?
How do the Deniers get so lucky?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=24129

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8214
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Poodle » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:45 pm

Poodle wrote:Dear Edgar ...

Thank you your kind offer to allow me to review your book by buying it for the price of $9.77. I will be happy to provide such review for the price of ... errrmmm ... $109.77. Hey - I have to make a living somehow.


My offer still stands ...


And two questions, Edgar -

a) How large is your family?
b) How many copies of the book have you sold?

User avatar
octopus1
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4893
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:11 pm
Custom Title: Deep Sea Mollusk
Location: West of Chester

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby octopus1 » Thu Dec 19, 2013 8:44 pm

Winfield wrote:I am not asking you to buy my science books.


However, earlier, this happened:

Winfield wrote:Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.


I like your use of the term "<id>" at least. Freud would have a field day with that...
"On the fence".... Without a cushion....

User avatar
kennyc
Has No Life
Posts: 12193
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 11:21 am
Custom Title: The Dank Side of the Moon
Location: Denver, CO

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby kennyc » Thu Dec 19, 2013 8:57 pm

octopus1 wrote:
Winfield wrote:I am not asking you to buy my science books.


However, earlier, this happened:

Winfield wrote:Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.


I like your use of the term "<id>" at least. Freud would have a field day with that...



as do the html rendering engines..
Kenny A. Chaffin
Art Gallery - Photo Gallery - Writing&Poetry - The Bleeding Edge
"Strive on with Awareness" - Siddhartha Gautama

User avatar
octopus1
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4893
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:11 pm
Custom Title: Deep Sea Mollusk
Location: West of Chester

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby octopus1 » Thu Dec 19, 2013 8:58 pm

kennyc wrote:
octopus1 wrote:
Winfield wrote:I am not asking you to buy my science books.


However, earlier, this happened:

Winfield wrote:Then, you definitely need to read my book entitled "Biology Of Intelligent Design <id>" so that you may have a better understanding of biological world.


I like your use of the term "<id>" at least. Freud would have a field day with that...



as do the html rendering engines..


He's covered all the bases :lol:
"On the fence".... Without a cushion....

Winfield
Poster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:04 am

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby Winfield » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:24 pm

Because it is Christmas, I am giving away my book for FREE for five days only.

http://www.amazon.com/Intelligent-Design-Turning-Scientific-Upside-ebook/dp/B00GWV41VA/ref=la_B00GXV028K_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387716088&sr=1-5

I want you to have a new science since I knew that you need them.

User avatar
octopus1
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4893
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:11 pm
Custom Title: Deep Sea Mollusk
Location: West of Chester

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby octopus1 » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:38 pm

Winfield wrote:Because it is Christmas, I am giving away my book for FREE for five days only.

http://www.amazon.com/Intelligent-Design-Turning-Scientific-Upside-ebook/dp/B00GWV41VA/ref=la_B00GXV028K_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387716088&sr=1-5

I want you to have a new science since I knew that you need them.


It's the thought that counts, eh? ;)
"On the fence".... Without a cushion....

User avatar
kennyc
Has No Life
Posts: 12193
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 11:21 am
Custom Title: The Dank Side of the Moon
Location: Denver, CO

Re: The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World

Postby kennyc » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:47 pm

I just downloaded and skimmed your entire book Edgar. You're a loon.

Carry on.
Kenny A. Chaffin
Art Gallery - Photo Gallery - Writing&Poetry - The Bleeding Edge
"Strive on with Awareness" - Siddhartha Gautama


Return to “Book Reviews/Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest