What is it with these creationist computer programmers, anyway?

This 'Ilion' guy is really something...

TGS seems not to know that Ilíon probably does know one or two things about RNG ("random" number generation) and "typical software production," since he has made his living as a computer programmer for 25+ years. But hey! some of the High Priests of 'Darwinism' make their livings as "scientists," and they clearly know nothing about practicing actual science, so please don't take Ilíon's professional qualifications, such as they are, as any sort of assertion of Authority.

Computer programming is "actual science"? Being a computer programmer for 25+ years means 'Ilion' (one T.D. Hailey) is qualified to do what now? Comment authoritatively on everything? I thought computer programming was computer programming. But apparently, computer programmers that are creationists have some magical quality that makes them experts on everything, just like computer programmer/engineer creationist R. David Pogge or Crevo (of dinosaurs and humans lived together fame...)...

These people need a lesson in simple humility.

Not to mention introductory biology...

Another delusional creationist in action

I'm not sure if I should feel sorry for people like Jorge Fernandez, or disgusted.

Fernandez is one of those "internet experts" on everything scientific. His background - which he uses to proclaim his superiority in making correct conclusions on all things scientific - includes a stint in the Air Force as a technician of some sort and supposedly working for DARPA, as well as supposedly being an adjunct statistics instructor at a community college in Florida (and we all know how much Florida values education). Plus, he claims to have a great 'analytical mind' and a personal library of over 1,000 books, so I mean, how could he possibly be wrong about anything?

Well, in addition to being one of the multitude of creationist "no new information" mongers who cannot provide a way in which to even define 'information' as per their argument, he also seems to be one of the many creationists with integrity/honesty problems.

Here, for example, we have documentation of a clear-cut exposure of Jorge Fernandez making diametrically opposed statements. Fernandez had claimed that an opponant was 'misreprenting' his views on whether or not Intelligent Design was a scientific alternative to evolution:

Originally posted by Jorge
You are misrepresenting my views, primarily on the grounds of ignorance. To say that I have suggested that "CSI/ID is a scientific alternative to evolution" is not only false, it's using inappropriate terms. What you've said sounded to me like the phrase "literature is an economic alternative to sea otters". [Yeah, I know, the phrase doesn't make any sense. Now you know how I felt after reading yours. Enjoy!]

A poster ('mentalist') juxtaposes the above quote with the following one, asking Fernandez if this guy is misrepresenting him, too:

Originally posted by Jorge
Among other things, the ID movement is designed to provide a scientifically-based alternative to that of evolution.
and
Originally posted by Jorge
The fact remains that ID is a genuinely viable alternative to evolution but is being kept out primarily because of ideological reasons.

Pretty clear cut, no? Two statements from the same person, stating the exact opposite sentiment. What is a person to do?
Let me re-ask the question - what would an honest person with integrity and dignity do?
I would hope that they would swallow their pride, apologize, and maybe slink away from the conversation to allow the embarrassment to subside.

So, what does a creationist do?

See for yourself:

Originally posted by Mentalist
How much would you say this guy was misrepresenting your views:
It's a shame neither of your personalities was blessed with intelligence or honesty.

Jorge:
You're p-r-o-j-e-c-t-i-n-g, Mentalist.
See, you never bothered to consider the fact that I was referring to the metaphysic of evolution, not the science of evolution. But then, you wouldn't know about such things, would you.
I'm blessed more than enough, thank you.
Jorge

Whaaa? 'Projecting'? Why would Mentalist - or anyone else - have considered it at all, much less as a "fact", that Fernandez was referring to the 'metaphysic' of evolution when he actually wrote explicitly about science? If he had meant the metaphysic of evolution, he should had written that. If he had meant that the "science" of ID should replace the metaphysic of evolution, he should have written as much.

Sadly, Fernandez is the most active creationist at that particular discussion board.

Terry Trainor, expert extraordinaire....

Terry Trainor in a creationist with a discussion board (yup, another one...).


Now, Trainor often implies that he has some special insights into, well, everything, due to his background (it is not in science, interestingly) and that his insights allow him to see the 'simple truths' of things. Like the "fact" that CFCs cannot possibly have anything to do with ozone depletion because they are heavier than air (starting here).
It is, if not comical, a bit painful, to watch Trainor's folly continue unabated by reality. Some good questions are asked of Terry, but, as is his tendency, he just banned the guy instead of answering them...

Or, we can take a look at Trainor's take on the 'wiring' of the retina.
It is really something - this thread leads into the depths of denial and distortion on Trainor's part that is, unfortunately, not so rare in creation/evolution discussions, but rarely is it so blatant.

To see this truly bizarre episode in creationist historical revisionism and dishonest antics continue, see Terry Trainor repeatedly misrepresent "Vik's" position, even after multiple corrections, ban him from his group for, rightly, getting mad at the repeated lies and stubborn misrepresentation by Trainor, and then insult him and lie some more after banning him for writing a zinger in response to repeated insults from another poster.

Amazing. Truly amazing. It is hard to find a more obvious, blatant series of acts designed to prop up a preconceived notion than what Trainor exhibits in the links provided.


Trainor's 'discussion board' is littered with such antics.

Why, if the creationist position is so "correct", so "true", so "scientific", do its most vocal and numerous proponanats feel the need to engage in such tactics so often?

Hiatus

Due to changes in my work and extramural activities, I will not be posting much for the forseeable future.

Thanks!

Where is Crevo (re: Haldane's dilemma)?

Been pretty busy of late, I have not had much time to refute more of Pogge's nonsense.
And I am still waiting to see if Crwevo will ever address the questions asked regarding "Haldane's dilemma" which he seems to think is some sort of problem for evolution...