On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 07:51:45 +0930, Michael Gray
<fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in alt.atheism

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 11:06:52 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
- Refer: <7hfii2djjfbv3ifk5vouks2f1lpec634qn@4ax.com>

On 3 Oct 2006 16:18:23 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote
in alt.atheism

http://dododreams.blogspot.com/2006/10/id-confidential.html
"They have research going on that will knock our socks off but it's Top
Secret! ID researchers are being harassed but their names are Top
Secret! . . . except for Francis Beckwith, who isn't a researcher and
who was being harassed by the faculty at a Baptist University ... he's
not Top Secret. There are other areas of science with stacked tenure
committees and rigged peer-review processes but which ones and where
are Top Secret! There's a lot that is happening, and it's exciting
but it's Top Secret!"

http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2006/10/i_grow_weary_of_id.php
"But look where [the creationists] are now. They had their day in court
and came off looking like fools. The only books they talk about now are
the hysterical political screeds by Ann Coulter and Jonathan Wells,
neither of which presents anything remotely new. And when you ask them
to tell you about the state of ID research, not even actual results
mind you but just a description of the work itself, they get
belligerent and nasty."

Here's how real science moves:

http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/10/02/a_nobel_prize_for_the_shadow_n.php
"This morning it was announced that two American scientists won the
Nobel Prize in Physiology and or Medicine, for their 1998 discovery of
a hidden network of genes. It may seem odd that a network of genes
could lurk undiscovered for so long. But the cell is very much a
mysterious place. In the 1950s, scientists established the basic model
for how genes work. A gene is made of DNA, the cell makes a
single-stranded copy of a gene in a molecule called RNA, and it then
uses the RNA as a template for building a protein. This so-called
Central Dogma proved to be correct for many thousands of genes, but not
all of them. In many cases, a gene's RNA is not a mere messenger. It
grabs onto other RNA molecules or proteins, and carries out some
important chemistry of its own."
And at Pharyngula:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/and_the_nobel_goes_to.php
I particularly liked Andy Groves comment at:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/and_the_nobel_goes_to.php#comment-231652
"I've said it before, and I'll say it again for the benefit of ID
supporters out there - this is what a real scientific revolution looks
like. Fire and Mello published their paper in 1998 (two years after
"Darwin's Black Box" came out, for those who are interested). Since
then, the number of primary research papers on RNAi, siRNAs and miRNAs
stands at 12399, using the search terms:
(RNAi OR siRNA OR miRNA) NOT review. 12400 papers in eight years.
That's 1550 a year, or just over four papers a day. Would Bill Dembski,
the Isaac Newton of information theory, care to comment?"

When has *anything* creation "science" or so-called intelligent
so-called design done resulted in an avalanche of scientific activity
like this? Where has ID prodiced even one tenth the number of research
papers the above RNA studies have? One every two days, give or take is
ONE TENTH the above activity. Where has ID even pretended it can
approach even that?

ID is dead. Creationism is dead. It's promoters and supporters are
simply too stupid to bury it.

What else can be expected from the mindless?

They have a vested interest in maintaining these fictions at any cost.
They retain their slim hold on wealth, power, influence, and under-age
sex by them.

Expect them to fight like cornered beasts.

They're lower than beasts. They're ebola.