From: me22over7@gmail.com   
      
   On 29/12/2025 4:33 am, RonO wrote:   
   > On 12/28/2025 8:01 AM, jillery wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 24 Dec 2025 21:07:17 -0600, RonO    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 12/24/2025 5:32 PM, sticks wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/24/2025 12:31 PM, RonO wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>> Merry Christmas and best wishes for the new year.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ---snip---   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Sad really that you couldn't have just stopped here with your followup,   
   >>>> but instead had to once again inject this obsession of yours into even   
   >>>> this.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> In 2026 TO will be 40.  Snipping out the relevant history doesn't change   
   >>> reality.  It is just a fact that the Supreme court decision should have   
   >>> been the end of the creationist denial stupidity, but it just caused the   
   >>> name change of creationism to intelligent design, and that court   
   >>> decision occurred just one year after TO started.  Creationists in   
   >>> denial like yourself and MarkE have been beating a dead horse for nearly   
   >>> as long as TO has existed.   
   >>>   
   >>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> To give credit where it's due, it could reasonably be argued that   
   >> Creationists are responsible for T.O.'s existence.   
   >>   
   >   
   > There probably is no doubt that TO would not exist if it were not for   
   > Biblical creationists.  They were satisfied with banning biological   
   > evolution from the public schools, but after Sputnik and the subsequent   
   > improvements in public school science textbooks, along with the reversal   
   > of the bans, anti evolution became more public.  Even after the failure   
   > of teaching scientific creationism in Arkansas the creationists just   
   > became worse in terms of the whackos posting to real science groups.   
   > They never had any valid science to discuss, and TO gave them a forum to   
   > be shown how bogus their views were without bothering serious science. A   
   > lot of them were much better than any IDiots ever were in terms of   
   > presenting their arguments.  Initially you had creationists trying to   
   > support their Biblical beliefs directly.  They were trying to justify a   
   > global flood, and young earth.  With the abject failure of these   
   > attempts TO started to get more of the switch scam denial type arguments   
   > that were in the Gish Gallop along with the continued efforts to support   
   > the Bible.  This persisted until the turn of the century.  The ID scam   
   > first came to TO in the 1990's as something that the creationists wanted   
   > to teach in the public schools, but no one seemed to know what the ID   
   > science was, but the stupid claims to support things like the Biblical   
   > flood persisted into the new century.   
   >   
   > The ID perps formed the ISCID (ID science organization) and it was   
   > active until the bait and switch started to go down in 2002.  The last   
   > paper that I recall being put up was in 2003, and the site was moribund   
   > until Dover hit the fan and the ID perps reformated the site.  One of   
   > the papers removed was the flood geology paper (Yes, a Biblical flood   
   > geology research paper had been put up on the ISCID site) that had been   
   > up on the site for years, but it didn't make the cut when the site was   
   > reformated in 2005.  The ID perps dissolved their science organization   
   > in 2008 likely because ID perps were likely the only members left.   
   >   
   > Philip Johnson posted to TO in the late 1990's, but he never discussed   
   > any ID science.  His denial claims were about the inadequacies of   
   > Darwinism.  The ID scam would not become the major topic of TO until   
   > after the Bait and Switch first went down in 2002, when every one with a   
   > clue knew that it was just a worthless scam.  Really, after the bait and   
   > switch started to go down Mike Gene claimed that he had given up on   
   > teaching the junk back in 1999, but he still supported using ID as bait   
   > until after the failure in Dover.   
   >   
   > The Supreme Court ruling against creation science occurred just a year   
   > after TO started, and resulted in the name change from creationism to   
   > intelligent design years before the ID scam unit at the Discovery   
   > Institute would be founded in 1995.  That is all just history.   
   >   
   > Ron Okimoto   
   >   
      
   RonO MO on TO:   
      
   Repetitively disparage, dismiss and accuse of fraud and deception   
   creationism and individual creationists, especially in relation to ID.   
      
   This approach is something like a creationist dismissing evolution using   
   copy-paste attacks on Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos etc.   
      
   Ron, if you imagine yourself to be protector and champion against the   
   evil of ID, I recommend a different approach.   
      
   On a good day you demonstrate expertise and ability to meaningfully   
   engage and contribute. Stop blowing smoke and give us more good days.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)