Friday, January 19, 2007

Quote of the Time Being #7

At Respectful Insolence:

David Cooke said

You have to list, in order, the stepwise mutations, deletions, transpositions, duplications, or whatever other currently known mechanisms of DNA change have actually occured to produce the information necessary to code for a human limb.

To prove you can drive from New York to San Francisco, you have to list in order all the movements of the accelerator and brake pedals, the precise amount that the steering has to be turned at any time and the duration of these activities, all the roadside signs and any stops that are made. If you can't do this, it clearly demonstrates that the only way to get from New York to San Francisco is by taking the train.

-Richard Simons


Anonymous said...

I especially like when someone asked Mr. (not Dr., that seems to piss him off) Cook to give them an example of a perfect machine. His example? The 5.7L turbocharged LS1 engine in his Camaro. How can he consider that even close to perfect when its efficiency is only 20% (IIRC)? Granted, I love that engine, but using a gasoline engine as an example of a perfect machine is like using Haggard as an example of a Christian.


Ryan Michael said...

I love how IDiots want this information relative to evolution, but can base their silly ideas on some ambiguous "designer"...

beepbeepitsme said...

Just ask them to list all the steps and procedures that "the designer" used to create everything.

Infophile said...

If only that worked. They demand all this explanation from us, but when it comes to explaining the designer and his methods, they either use special pleading to get out of it or claim that the burden of proof is on us.

When did an omnipotent being become the default explanation for everything?

...Oh, right. Well, when can we stop this?

Anonymous said...

No it doesn't.

If you can't list in order all the movements of the accelerator and brake pedals blah blah blah, it means that God must have raptured you from New York and de-raptured you in San Fransisco.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I should have said the omnipotent guy with the big beard who may or may not be God.

ID isn't about religion folks.

JackalMage said...

Ooh, I like it. I like it a lot.

Bob said...

I've seen Richard in the comments on Scienceblogs before, and I'm wondering if he's the same Richard Simmons that I studied with not too long ago. I should drop him a line and ask.

Dikkii said...

I get worried around stuff like this.

It just goes to show that DI are successfully marketing ID to audiences other than poor white trash.

And when Cook got upset at "Mr" and not "Dr", that had me in stitches.

Kinda like what UK academic Germaine Greer did when she won one of the 2006 Golden Bull Awards.

Bob said...

Nope. Not the same Richard Simmons.

Don said...

I particularly enjoyed when Captain Cook said, essentially, "labeling me as an ID Creationist is a debate ender...So I'm going to quit talking to you."

Way to poorly obfuscate your huffy goodbye, Doctor.

And I loved your short comment, BD. Cute how Cook failed to address it, or any other substantive posts, and instead called out false ad hominems all while making the argument that "Orac is anonymous and stupid so he is wrong!"