<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on Intelligent Design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/more-on-intelligent-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/more-on-intelligent-design/</link>
	<description>A biblioblog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:23:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: island</title>
		<link>http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/more-on-intelligent-design/#comment-22704</link>
		<dc:creator>island</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/06/more-on-intelligent-design/#comment-22704</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Then there was Island, who seems to think ad hominem attacks are the way to go.&lt;/i&gt;

Yeah, okay, so you have no clue how you insulted me first, and you won't get it no matter what... gotcha.

&lt;i&gt;In response to my statement that the size of the universe makes it likely that the exact conditions for life would be found in a large number of places, Island said&lt;/i&gt;

No, the point that you seem to have missed, (as you've accused your opponents of doing), "willfully ignoring", is that "likely" has nothing to do with it, in the manner that you meant it, which was based soley on numerous opportunities, rather than the very good *predictable* physical reasons that the physics defines, but nice try... no, wait, no it wasn't.

&lt;i&gt;The “many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics” is a result of Einstein’s theories.&lt;/i&gt;

No, that's still just as false as it was the first time that you said it.

And just an FYI, but I wasn't debating you, I was slamming you for making false statements, that too typically follow the reactionary line of preconceived mediocrity that neodarwinians *automatically* apply, without bothering to do any real honest unbiased research into the subject. 

Most of them are also rabid atheists, and you can find the same kind of pre-motivated non-arguements at "atheistsRUs, but just about any fanatical liberal will suffice...

If I wrongly mistook you forh harboring any of that, then I'm sorry...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Then there was Island, who seems to think ad hominem attacks are the way to go.</i></p>
<p>Yeah, okay, so you have no clue how you insulted me first, and you won&#8217;t get it no matter what&#8230; gotcha.</p>
<p><i>In response to my statement that the size of the universe makes it likely that the exact conditions for life would be found in a large number of places, Island said</i></p>
<p>No, the point that you seem to have missed, (as you&#8217;ve accused your opponents of doing), &#8220;willfully ignoring&#8221;, is that &#8220;likely&#8221; has nothing to do with it, in the manner that you meant it, which was based soley on numerous opportunities, rather than the very good *predictable* physical reasons that the physics defines, but nice try&#8230; no, wait, no it wasn&#8217;t.</p>
<p><i>The “many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics” is a result of Einstein’s theories.</i></p>
<p>No, that&#8217;s still just as false as it was the first time that you said it.</p>
<p>And just an FYI, but I wasn&#8217;t debating you, I was slamming you for making false statements, that too typically follow the reactionary line of preconceived mediocrity that neodarwinians *automatically* apply, without bothering to do any real honest unbiased research into the subject. </p>
<p>Most of them are also rabid atheists, and you can find the same kind of pre-motivated non-arguements at &#8220;atheistsRUs, but just about any fanatical liberal will suffice&#8230;</p>
<p>If I wrongly mistook you forh harboring any of that, then I&#8217;m sorry&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
