Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: To sum up
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 19:15:29 +1100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vo9o72$h13g$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vo1kt4$2r8m5$1@dont-email.me>
 <tq29qjl9ln2s9uou8c4da1r6dpmidesnsd@4ax.com>
 <6qceqjhouj6a1r7cj9s1f7npgc406nbfqv@4ax.com> <vo7dmt$qvu$1@dont-email.me>
 <58leqjt7sftjfilii9rctp5udtul1s9qt2@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="20700"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RYe/xls2+QHlcSWX19Gxb+rrgR0=
Return-Path: <news@eternal-september.org>
X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
	id A4FB822978C; Sun, 09 Feb 2025 03:15:45 -0500 (EST)
	by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60ED1229783
	for <talk-origins@ediacara.org>; Sun, 09 Feb 2025 03:15:43 -0500 (EST)
	id 7EAD31C087C; Sun,  9 Feb 2025 08:15:39 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
	by newsfeed.bofh.team (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BF241C06C7
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sun,  9 Feb 2025 08:15:39 +0000 (UTC)
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.eternal-september.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB8245FD81
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sun,  9 Feb 2025 08:15:37 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: name/EB8245FD81; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
	id 4A64DDC01CA; Sun,  9 Feb 2025 09:15:31 +0100 (CET)
X-Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2025 09:15:31 +0100 (CET)
Content-Language: en-US
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1+/y99weRSc+2ITq/WqbaOMUlqAMPM6iyQ=
In-Reply-To: <58leqjt7sftjfilii9rctp5udtul1s9qt2@4ax.com>
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED,
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,
	USER_IN_WELCOMELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
	smtp.eternal-september.org
Bytes: 4398

On 9/02/2025 12:02 am, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 22:03:57 +1100, MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/02/2025 9:39 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
>>> On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 10:17:26 +0000, Martin Harran
>>> <martinharran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:29:54 +1100, MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Has talk.origins run its course, with this incarnation (post-GG
>>>>> meteorite impact) the last of the dinosaurs?
>>>>>
>>>>> And what of the Origins debate? My contention is that progressive
>>>>> discoveries with the complexity and precision of life are making Mt
>>>>> Improbable higher and higher [1]. ID has gained and sustained traction
>>>>> because this trend is real.
>>>>
>>>> What evidence have you got that ID has gained and sustained traction?
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> So, nothing to offer. Appears to be just another example of you
>>> thinking something *should* be true just because you would like it to
>>> be true.
>>>
>>
>> No response does not equal nothing to offer, especially in this context,
>> as we both well know.
> 
> You choosing to moan about my "cheap shot", rather than demolishing my
> point by offering some evidence, speaks volumes.

Okay, I'm happy to do a reset, and accept some blame here.

I am interested in reviewing the state of ID. I'm somewhat ambivalent 
about ID myself actually, though I think it does have merit. I'll start 
a new post to give the invitation visibility (i.e. paint a target on 
myself).

> 
> 
>>
>> Once again, a cheap shot over substantive comment, with a disregard for
>> logic. I don't believe you're engaging in good faith, Martin.
>>
>