From: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Bob makes a funny
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:40:05 GMT
Organization: animal -- coelomate -- deuterostome

In article <7632@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM> bobb@tekig1.PEN.TEK.COM (Robert W Bales) writes:

>Chris Colby writes, regarding confusion between the program Populus and the
>computer game Populous:

>Similarly, isn't it
>possible that a description that conflicted with that of the game might not
>have been enough to dislodge the wrong identific.  Could it be that Lionel
>is not familiar enough with the details of the game that the description
>sounded wrong?  

I described Populus (the simulation) in detail, it would be awful hard
to confuse the two _if Lionel had read the rest of my post_. Lionel
apparently knows something about the game because he said "I thought
there was something fishy about that game [I'm paraphrasing]". 

>Could it be some other possibilty which would allow an
>honest person to be honestly confused?

If someone read my post and knew about the program, I don't see how
there could be any confusion; I think Lionel didn't read the rest of
the post. The only other alternatives are: he is unfamiliar with the
game or he is absolutely incapable of even the lowest level of
reading comprehension. 

>>Thank you for once again demonstrating how entirely morally and
>>intellectually bankrupt you creationists are.

>"I'm sorry sir, but we're going to deny you a security clearance"
>"Why?
>"Our information is that you are morally bankrupt."
>"WHAT??!"
>"Yes.  It seems that back in 1992, you confused the names of two
>computer programs."

Nice joke, Bob. Have a +6 on me. But realise that the humor succeeds,
as a lot of humor does, by spectacularly missing the point. The point
of my flame was Lionel never takes the time to learn anything about what
he is criticizing.

Take his repeated attempts (like his recent chess analogy, for example)
to equate evolution with mutation only. We have told him _numerous_
times that mutation is "filtered" by natural selection; but he
refuses to acknowledge that in his continuing attacks on evolution.
Likewise, his response to my initial post clearly indicated that he
read the first paragraph and shot off a response without bothering
to read any further. I was criticizing Lionel's (or as Andy has so
aptly renamed him, Lie-onel's) refusal to even consider thinking about
ideas that contradict his worldview. I was not flaming him for
simply confusing the two programs. Honest confusion would only be 
possible if you were completely stupid (or Onar, or something 8-)
In that case, I'd have just emailed him and corrected his error.

>It seems on the net  that creationists are not able to be confused, make a
>mistake, see things differently, or draw different conclusions from the
>evidence.  Stupid and unlearned though we are, it seems that we are held to
>be immune from such common failings. 

If Lie-onel only made honest mistakes, I wouldn't have pointed my
flame-thrower at him. I don't, however, think refusing to acknowledge
(or even to attempt to comprehend) your opponents views in a debate is an 
honest strategy.

>Since we obviously see immediately the
>absolute truth of what is told us in this group, if we offer a differing
>opinion, it *must* be due to our hidden adgendas, bigotry, lying natures, and
>moral and intellecual bankruptcy. :-) :-) :-)

Thanks for finally admitting this, Bob 8-)

>>It must be a neverending source of joy to meander through your little fantasy
>>world where supernatural beings are mixed up in the affairs of humans

>Would Chris present evidence that supernatural involvement occurs only in a
>fantasy world? 

Tell you what, old chum; I'll swap you even up for a scientific theory
of creationism. How does that sound?

>   Bob Bales

Chris Colby 	---	 email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu	---
"'My boy,' he said, 'you are descended from a long line of determined,
resourceful, microscopic tadpoles--champions every one.'"
 	--Kurt Vonnegut from "Galapagos"