Kalamata:
"You were smug.
I believe you characterized his lecture as a “rabbit hole”." I don't do "smug", that's your bailiwick.
Your video was a 58 minute rabbit hole which provided no useful information except what amounted to an advertisement for job openings in the research field of abiogenesis.
But, in the end Tour tried to shut down such research by claiming "some people" hyped up their results beyond what is justified.
Since, Tour tells us, those people need to be punished, he would shut down further research until they are!
That's not just a rabbit hole, it's a Black Hole (& black eye) for science.
Kalamata: "You are guessing."
You're guessing to claim that Federal dollars directly support abiogenesis research.
Kalamata: "When are you going to throw out a single pebble of evidence from that mountain you claim to exist?
Admit it.
You don’t know of any scientific evidence for evolutionism, and you are merely parrotting propaganda from the party line."
Here's what I know for certain: deniers, like Holocaust deniers, simply deny anything which contradicts their own claims.
You yourself can go & see tons of physical evidence of evolution at any natural history museum, but you won't go, and if you did go you won't see, and if you did see you'd just deny, deny, deny.
Denial is who you are, denial is what you do, facts don't matter, nothing matters to you beyond your own claims.
Kalamata: "I believe Tour was being much too lenient.
We should shut down ALL research that has been over-hyped.
That would release the taxpayer from any obligation to fund the religion of evolutionism and the big-bang."
With "over-hyped" and "religion" to be defined exclusively by Grand Inquisitor Kalamata, and the length of punishment will be set by Pope James Tour, right?
Kalamata: "Start at 54:48 for Tour’s statements on the moratorium.
No real scientist would object. He finished at 56:00."
So you skip right over the part where Tour makes his "moratorium" a punishment for the irredeemable sin of "over-hyping" science?
Kalamata: "You mischaracterized his statement.
Immediately after the 56:00 mark, he paused while awaing the commpletion of the applause, and then said, “I’m just going to finish up.” "
I accurately reported what Tour said, and more important, the impression it left.
Indeed, you yourself say Tour's punishment of science is not near strong enough, so their's no point in you denying he said it.
Kalamata: "I would have preferred John 8:44, but Deut 13:3-4 was more than appropriate."
Neither text, nor any other similar, has anything remotely to do with natural-science.
The "father of lies" are those who pretend they do, FRiend. ![]()
>>I don't do "smug", that's your bailiwick.
Smug is your middle name.
********************************
>>Your video was a 58 minute rabbit hole which provided no useful information except what amounted to an advertisement for job openings in the research field of abiogenesis.
No, it was an appeal to all knuckleheads trying to do the impossible to return to science.
********************************
>>But, in the end Tour tried to shut down such research by claiming "some people" hyped up their results beyond what is justified.
He was being kind. They lied.
********************************
>>Since, Tour tells us, those people need to be punished, he would shut down further research until they are!
You left out the part where he wants them to quit lying to the public.
********************************
>>That's not just a rabbit hole, it's a Black Hole (& black eye) for science.
That is exactly what James Tour is trying to tell you about abiogenesis, and more, as follows:
Here's the ramifications of calling conjectures"facts":
- Claims that mislead the patient taxpayer are unhelpful, and the public will even distrust scientific claims into other fields.
- Uncorrected or unfounded assertions jeopardize science beyond a singular field. especially since there's mounting distrust of higher education in general.
- Condescending comments toward the public or a student if they will not embrace our conjectures as facts, will lead to continued division between our scientists and non-scientists, which can yield public reluctance to fund our research.
- We must tell the truth with specificity. If it is a fact, say it. if it not a fact, say it.
- Blackballing scientists if they bear legitimate non-conformist views, by excluding them from professional societies and academies, withholding their funding or denying them tenure, is anti-scientific and it will retard the advancement of science.
********************************
>>You're guessing to claim that Federal dollars directly support abiogenesis research.
Okay, you show us how it is funded.
********************************
>>Here's what I know for certain: deniers, like Holocaust deniers, simply deny anything which contradicts their own claims.
Only a sleazy con-man would attempt to lump holocaust deniers in with those who oppose pseudoscience. But if that is the only argument they have to protect against threats to their fairy tale world-view, then what choice do they have?
Speaking of sleazy con-men, that is the same tactic Donald Prothero uses against those who oppose his version of pseudo-science. In general, that tactic is in common use by the scientifically-challenged.
********************************
>>You yourself can go and see tons of physical evidence of evolution at any natural history museum, but you won't go, and if you did go you won't see, and if you did see you'd just deny, deny, deny. Denial is who you are, denial is what you do, facts don't matter, nothing matters to you beyond your own claims.
Been there, done that, saw no evidence, only fraud.
Admit it. You know of no evidence for evolution, so you must resort to the party line of ad hominems and wild goose chases.
You are such a lightweight.
********************************
>>We should shut down ALL research that has been over-hyped.
That would be the honest thing to do, but perhaps with a grace period. But there is a lot of bad science out there, and a lot of hype.
********************************
>>With "over-hyped" and "religion" to be defined exclusively by Grand Inquisitor Kalamata, and the length of punishment will be set by Pope James Tour, right?
Can I assume you are satisfied with the statis quo of "over-hype" and "religion" being defined by the Grand Inquisitor Richard Dawkins, and the punishment set by Pope Ken Miller?
********************************
>>So you skip right over the part where Tour makes his "moratorium" a punishment for the irredeemable sin of "over-hyping" science?
Since you insist, I will post it again:
Here's the ramifications of calling conjectures"facts":
- Claims that mislead the patient taxpayer are unhelpful, and the public will even distrust scientific claims into other fields.
- Uncorrected or unfounded assertions jeopardize science beyond a singular field. especially since there's mounting distrust of higher education in general.
- Condescending comments toward the public or a student if they will not embrace our conjectures as facts, will lead to continued division between our scientists and non-scientists, which can yield public reluctance to fund our research.
- We must tell the truth with specificity. If it is a fact, say it. if it not a fact, say it.
- Blackballing scientists if they bear legitimate non-conformist views, by excluding them from professional societies and academies, withholding their funding or denying them tenure, is anti-scientific and it will retard the advancement of science.
You know that drives the evolutionism orthodoxy batty.
********************************
>>I accurately reported what Tour said, and more important, the impression it left. Indeed, you yourself say Tour's punishment of science is not near strong enough, so their's no point in you denying he said it.
Asking for a moratorium is not punishment, except in the strange world you dwell in. I personally would prefer suing to get our tax dollars back from those charlatans. I would also force rehiring and reinstatement by all who have been blackballed by evolutionism thugs.
********************************
>>Neither text, nor any other similar, has anything remotely to do with natural-science. The "father of lies" are those who pretend they do, FRiend.
The father of lies teaches men to doubt the Word of God. The children of the father of lies teach children their ancestors were apes.
Mr. Kalamata