Dante Hicks is not my favourite person.

[Nodrog]

Hopefully we will one day reach a level where the ideas of Karl Marx
are roughly equal to those of Charles Darwin. Recently, as I walked
down a South London street, I saw a religious man who was shouting
about God's word, and the heresy of evolutionary theory. Did the
police come and bash his head in? No, people just walked past him,
most of them smirking at this complete nutter. People who have been
educated properly in evolutionary theory see the _logic_ behind it.
(Obviously religion persists, but still...)

Hopefully one day the ideals of the free-market will be as absurd as
creationism. Eventually someone will be shouting about Milton
Friedman's word, and the heresey of Marxism, as people walk past them
laughing.

Darian Linehan

Youre a delusional visionary. Please refrain from making such posts in future.

[Deffeh]

im upset you hate dante more than you like me

[Dante Hicks]

Googling someone is .

There's also some stuff on Google Groups about Duckman if you look (I think). I think there earliest thing is from '99.

[NEWSBOT3]

i don't belive in the THEORY of evolution. (and it IS just a theory, thanks)

edit : i should clarify

whilst i certainly agree that evolution happens in the world, i don't believe it is the method by which the human race has come to be.

[Dante Hicks]

So do I, as it increases the amount of threads with "dante" in the title.

Anyway, there's various stuff on there (Baron Morte, check out some of the Daniel Dennet posts actually) some of which I don't agree with anymore, but I think most of it should be relatively coherent.

If you search for [email protected] (my old e-mail address) you can find some Usenet posts of people abusing me too. I think there's a specific thread called "[email protected] is a ****ing moron" or something.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

i don't belive in the THEORY of evolution. (and it IS just a theory, thanks)

edit : i should clarify

whilst i certainly agree that evolution happens in the world, i don't believe it is the method by which the human race has come to be.

Thanks for making this post so my original comments (in Nod's quote) are no longer the stupidest thing in this thread. Hopefully Mark can come here soon and reply to you, thus obliterating the thread.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

i don't belive in the THEORY of evolution. (and it IS just a theory, thanks)

I didn't expect to have to say this to you...

LEARN WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC MEANING OF THE WORD 'THEORY' IS YOU NUTTER

[Snurx]

Yo Dante, communism suck, but hey, better then nodrog at least

[Dante Hicks]

fs, I just realised I horribly overuse the word "hopefully" even now.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Googling someone is .

There's also some stuff on Google Groups about Duckman if you look (I think). I think there earliest thing is from '99.

Out of interest,are you just as much of a raving marxist faggot as you were back then and you just dont show it that much here, or have you mellowed out slightly over the last X years?

[Phang]

ITT NB3 doesnt quite scrape together enough intelligence to merit his survival

[Dante Hicks]

At 12:21

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Hopefully Mark can come here soon and reply to you, thus obliterating the thread.

At 12:22

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

I didn't expect to have to say this to you...

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Thanks for making this post so my original comments (in Nod's quote) are no longer the stupidest thing in this thread. Hopefully Mark can come here soon and reply to you, thus obliterating the thread.

I didn't see this post

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

fs, I just realised I horribly overuse the word "hopefully" even now.

You only use it twice, and it's a standard oratoric practice to have repitition of words at the start of sections, it adds flow. Although the word itself is a little weak.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

Out of interest,are you just as much of a raving marxist faggot as you were back then and you just dont show it that much here, or have you mellowed out slightly over the last X years?

I'm still a Marxist but I've probably mellowed out. My biggest influences used to Marx & Engels then Lenin then Kropotkin (possibly). Now it's Marx & Engels / Chomsky / Russell.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

I didn't expect to have to say this to you...

LEARN WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC MEANING OF THE WORD 'THEORY' IS YOU NUTTER

I think it was fairly obvious from his post that he was trying to make the distinction between evolution as a scientific process, and evolution as a metaphysical theory explaining how humans got here. Try to see past the letters on your screen to the meaning behind them.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

I think it was fairly obvious from his post that he was trying to make the distinction between evolution as a scientific process, and evolution as a metaphysical theory explaining how humans got here. Try to see past the letters on your screen to the meaning behind them.

I don't see how that's obvious. In fact, if you check his edit, I think he's not saying that at all.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

I think it was fairly obvious from his post that he was trying to make the distinction between evolution as a scientific process, and evolution as a metaphysical theory explaining how humans got here. Try to see past the letters on your screen to the meaning behind them.

Yes, I know that. However, his use of the word theory rather precluded him knowing what he was talking about, duder.

'That theory of relativity, it's JUST A THEORY'

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

I'm still a Marxist but I've probably mellowed out. My biggest influences used to Marx & Engels then Lenin then Kropotkin (possibly). Now it's Marx & Engels / Chomsky / Russell.

The sheer faggotry from Russell alone probably actually manages to eclipse the other 3.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Yes, I know that. However, his use of the word theory rather precluded him knowing what he was talking about, duder.

'That theory of relativity, it's JUST A THEORY'

well it is.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

well it is.

In the sense that it's not a theorem, yes. But I don't see how you can ascribe the word 'just' to the maximum state of probably correctness in the scientific system.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

The sheer faggotry from Russell alone probably actually manages to eclipse the other 3.

You suck.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

In the sense that it's not a theorem, yes. But I don't see how you can ascribe the word 'just' to the maximum state of probably correctness in the scientific system.

Its sometimes useful to point out to non-scientists that something is 'just' a theory because a lot of people see scientific theories as having the same degree of 'objectivity' as equations and empirical lab observations, rather than being metaphysical extrapolations of the 2 concepts mentioned above. The layman often has an annoying tendancy to think that "theory X is true because science says so", and it can be illuminating to point out that theory X is 'just' a theory and as such is open to revision at a future date, rather than somehow being an eternal and objective law of science.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

You suck.

o rly

[KaneED]

he has a funny name

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Anyway, there's various stuff on there (Baron Morte, check out some of the Daniel Dennet posts actually) some of which I don't agree with anymore, but I think most of it should be relatively coherent.
.

Quoting this because he should. I like reading Dante's posts because he comes across as being intelligent and articulate even 4-5 years ago when he was just a stupid teenager

[Dante Hicks]

Of the 6 threads with the word "Dante" in the title, three are abusive towards me, and one of the other ones was closed by a mod with the comments :

WHAT SORT OF A COMPLETE FAGGOT ARE YOU? IT'D ACTUALLY BE LESS GAY IF YOU'D SAID YOU WENT TO HIRE A RENTBOY BECAUSE AT LEAST THEN IT'D BE VAGUELY FUNNY AS WELL!

Thanks guys, I can feel the <3

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by KaneED

he has a funny name

When I met him he was wearing an 'all your base' t-shirt

true story

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

we was wearing an 'all your base' t-shirt

Yeah, I think you might want to edit that lest you share in my faggotry.

[Nodrog]

good call

[Nodrog]

dante what are your views on this

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

dante what are your views on this

From an actual MSN conversation I'm having right now :
I care says:
I still dont belive you have no reservations about having sex with a 15 year old girl

:eek:

But race mixing laws would have the same effect in a rational society anyway

[Nodrog]

I think 15 is lower than half your age plus seven mang

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

I think 15 is lower than half your age plus seven mang

If only all laws had such rational basis.

[NEWSBOT3]

mark needs to accept that not everyone is obsessed with empirical proof of everything.

apart from which, how many of you lot actually know anything about darwins theory, and how it came about, and how its been clung too by people despite it not fitting the facts ?

edit : and my emphasis on theory in the first case, was because there is no proof that evolution happened as the major factor in the creation of the human race.
There are plenty of circumstancial facts, which all get nicely linked together though.

[Nodrog]

How can any historical claim involving something that happened X thousand years ago ever be proven other than with circumstantial facts that link together nicely?

[NEWSBOT3]

indeed.

[queball]

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

mark needs to accept that not everyone is obsessed with empirical proof of everything.

apart from which, how many of you lot actually know anything about darwins theory, and how it came about, and how its been clung too by people despite it not fitting the facts ?

edit : and my emphasis on theory in the first case, was because there is no proof that evolution happened as the major factor in the creation of the human race.
There are plenty of circumstancial facts, which all get nicely linked together though.

I liked 2001 too.

(Oh and yeah, the HPS course must be pretty shit for people to turn out like MrL.)

[Lupin]

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

edit : and my emphasis on theory in the first case, was because there is no proof that evolution happened as the major factor in the creation of the human race.
There are plenty of circumstancial facts, which all get nicely linked together though.

in what do you believe? god created everything or did you made up your own theory?

[Nodrog]

hold on i think some stupid hamhamgot has edited my original post

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by queball

I liked 2001 too.

(Oh and yeah, the HPS course must be pretty shit for people to turn out like MrL.)

hasnt cambridge always been full of stupid overempiricalistic faggots?

[Radical Edward]

newsbot need to be bitch slapped for being a troll.

[NEWSBOT3]

i would if i was trolling.

[Deciduous]

The alternatives to evolution seem to be strung together with even less plausible 'proof'

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

mark needs to accept that not everyone is obsessed with empirical proof of everything.

However, SCIENCE IS. It's like saying that 'footballers are obsessed with kicking balls, those silly bastards!'

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

apart from which, how many of you lot actually know anything about darwins theory, and how it came about, and how its been clung too by people despite it not fitting the facts ?

Plain darwinism was discarded a long time ago. Science moves on. Aside from that, point out the lack of fitting with the facts, and I'll be glad to discuss them until giles comes along and says something definitive.

Originally Posted by NEWSBOT3

edit : and my emphasis on theory in the first case, was because there is no proof that evolution happened as the major factor in the creation of the human race.
There are plenty of circumstancial facts, which all get nicely linked together though.

It depends how you define 'circumstantial', of course. Whilst it is certainly true that there is a lack of repeatable experiment on the subject, it is certainly true that the concept 'evolution' exists, and has been seen to occur (ditto speciation), and it's entirely logical to extend this concept.

I'll also quote giles on the subject:

Originally Posted by Giles

It is daft to assert that 'the theory of evolution' is right or wrong as a whole. Physical theories that get superceded tend to be single mathematical frameworks, so when part goes they collapse entirely, at least as a metaphysical system. Whereas evolutionary theory encompasses pretty much the whole of biology in one form or another, but the logical links are not as strong or rigid as in a physical theory. so if contemporary ideas of speciation turn out to be wrong the rest of the science will be basically ok. It should also be noted that much of evolution is somewhere between (the classic philosophical conception of) science and history, wherein reinterpretation is prevalent rather than outright refutation. Finally, dealing with a process that can be pinned down to a particular time and place helps to make our limited sample of the possible observations more persausive as representatives of the whole.

Whilst it doesn't directly apply (it was responding to a substantially different opinion), there are areas in there which are applicable.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by queball

(Oh and yeah, the HPS course must be pretty shit for people to turn out like MrL.)

I haven't taken HPS, although I'd like to. Unfortunately (assuming I'm not changing to mathematics, course wise, instead of sticking with N/C S) I won't be taking it, as I'd be taking Physics, Advanced Physics and Maths. I could still go to the lectures, but the most interesting parts would be the supervisions.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

hasnt cambridge always been full of stupid overempiricalistic faggots?

Damn scientists, with their 'empiricism'

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

hold on i think some stupid hamhamgot has edited my original post

haha, you got bitchslapped by the man.

NB3 : And what should I learn about Darwin's theory? I've read quite a few things, and the argument is pretty solid from the literature I've read. I can recommend a few texts if you like from "my side". What would you recommend I read that represents your side?

Nod : Do you actually not believe in evolution, or are you quasi-trolling?

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

And what should I learn about Darwin's theory? I've read quite a few things, and the argument is pretty solid from the literature I've read. I can recommend a few texts if you like from "my side". What would you recommend I read that represents your side?

There's not all the much available for the layman; the best would probably be Dawkins, combined with SJG's more general works on science (this is a general post, not replying to you btw). It must also be noted that, as I said before, evolutionary theory has moved on since Darwin, although more recently we've been finding things that he suggested, that weren't held to be true, actually are (the best example of this is speciation without a physical barrier between the seperating species, which I believed happened in some sort of coral reef based fish in the pacific, although my memory isn't what it was* on this subject)


*I think the entire earth was destroyed

[Dante Hicks]

Even though he sucks in some ways, I really like Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea". It pretty much does lay out the whole evolution argument well, although it spends too much time having arguments with SJG.

I made the mistake of reading Dawkins after the other stuff (Gould, Dennett, Lewontin, Pinker), so I found his evolution stuff a little "obvious".

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Nod : Do you actually not believe in evolution, or are you quasi-trolling?

I didnt mention my belief in evolution in this thread... I only posted 2 things semi-related to it; one was a clarification of what I thought NB3 said, and the other was a comment about the use of the word theory in general.