From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 8/27/2025 4:40 AM, jillery wrote:   
   > On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 16:55:35 +1000, MarkE  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 27/08/2025 1:11 am, sticks wrote:   
   >>> On 8/25/2025 9:23 PM, Chris Thompson wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> ---snip---   
   >>>   
   >>>> Alas, at the risk of passing irrevocably through the gates of Old   
   >>>> Fartdom, I have to inform you that talk.origins is a pale shadow of   
   >>>> its former self. The halcyon days of moonstones, the felt effect of   
   >>>> gravity, and woodpecker tongues are never to be revisited. So don't   
   >>>> get your hopes up.   
   >>>> You are correct that Ron tends to view everything through the lens of,   
   >>>> as he puts it, the ID scam. To give Ron his due, Mark E sometimes   
   >>>> posts material that doesn't contain overt religious assertion, but   
   >>>> fear not: they're almost certainly lurking just below the surface. The   
   >>>> stuff above is a fair example: Peltzer IS an accomplished chemist. But   
   >>>> he's also an IDist, and his testimony in Kansas really was (again Ron   
   >>>> is correct here) a God of the gaps argument.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> One thing you might do, is look at the TO website (talkorigins.org).   
   >>>> It's not been updated since the Permian, but there are a bunch of   
   >>>> excellent articles there under "Post of the Month".   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Now get off my lawn!   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Chris   
   >>>   
   >>> I shall find time to go to talkorigins.org.  Thank you.   
   >>> I'll also keep an eye out for those references to the God of the Gaps to   
   >>> see how specifically it is referred to in this group.  It seems people   
   >>> view this concept differently.   
   >>>   
   >>> BTW, I'm back on the sidewalk now.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> If you're interested, here are t.o topics that give some context in   
   >> relation to the comments in this thread and where I'm coming from.   
   >>   
   >> - A summary of my own position and approach, and similar from others:   
   >>   
   >> "Why do you participate here?"   
   >> https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/8fuyuKN4VhE/m/xUYwSeYQAQAJ   
   >>   
   >> - A proposal on handling scientific evidence and avoiding a   
   >> god-of-the-gaps error:   
   >>   
   >> "Terms of Engagement?"   
   >> https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/Q0H4U47iYgk/m/2fprGczIBwAJ   
      
   The origin of life god-of-the-gaps creationist stupidity is #3 of the ID   
   perp's Top Six and the vast majority of IDiotic creationist support for   
   the ID scam cannot accept the god responsible for the creation of life   
   over 3 billion years ago on this planet.  Most of the IDiot posters had   
   quit the ID scam the year before you were continuing to wallow in the   
   denial in the post above.   
      
   You never were able to avoid the creationist god-of-the-gaps error   
   because you never would face what the gap denial meant for your   
   religious beliefs.  You continue to lie about why you support the   
   god-of-the-gaps stupidity, and you refuse to deal with what filling that   
   gap with some god would mean to your religious beliefs, probably,   
   because you can't accept such a god's existence.  Just like the other   
   IDiots that quit the ID scam when the Top Six did not support their   
   religious beliefs.  You just use the denial to lie to yourself in order   
   to maintain the belief that the gap denial somehow still supports your   
   religious beliefs.  None of the IDiots supported the IDiotic   
   god-of-the-gaps denial because of the science including yourself.  When   
   it became evident that the god that fills those gaps was not the   
   Biblical god they quit the ID scam, but you continued on in some type of   
   delusional state.   
      
   Why do you refuse to state how the gap relates to your religious   
   beliefs?  You know that your religious beliefs are the main reason for   
   continuing the gap denial, so why can't you face what filling the gap   
   with some god would mean to your religious beliefs?   
      
   If you accept that the god that could fill the origin of life gap could   
   be the Biblical god, in spite of the fact that the Bible is wrong about   
   the creation, then you would be like most of the Biblical creationists   
   that do not need to resort to the god-of-the-gaps denial because such a   
   god could have filled the gaps in any way that we can think of.  What is   
   described in the Bible never happened the way it is described in the   
   Bible, and is just as wrong as the shape of the Earth, geocentrism, and   
   the Biblical age of the earth.  An ID perp like Denton only requires one   
   gap (the Big Bang) and claims that the rest all unfolded into what we   
   have today.  He is still a god-of-the-gaps creationist, but he has   
   minimized the gaps, and doesn't worry about all the gaps that are not   
   consistent with the Biblical creation.  Denton understands that his gap   
   denial isn't scientific, but he doesn't care because practical science   
   basically ends at the Big Bang singularity.   
      
   Ron Okimoto   
      
   >>   
   >> An example of an assessment of some reasonably current OOL science   
   >> commentary which IMO is revealing of how overstated progress in this   
   >> field is:   
   >>   
   >> "Excellent presentation by Bruce Damer and Dave Deamer"   
   >> https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/HMw_ZoXIIOc/m/GhDNtzHcAAAJ   
   >   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)