Dr. Jerry Bergman on NPR's Science Friday!

[VoxRat]

HA!
Just kidding.Phages Fight Bacteria (broadcast Friday, April 4th, 2008) (http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200804043)

This image depicts the structure of the T4 virus, one type of bacteriophage. Frederick A. Eiserling/UCLA and Petr Leiman/Purdue Department of Biological
In the days before modern antibiotics, some researchers saw bacteriophages, viruses that can seek out and destroy bacteria, as a promising candidate for fighting infections. Now, as more organisms develop resistance to existing antibiotics, phage research is finding new favor.

At the Society for General Microbiology meeting in Edinburgh, researchers presented work on incorporating bacteriophages into dressings for wounds and cleaning materials used in hospitals. The scientists found a way to bind the phages to polymer particles, allowing the viruses to remain active for up to three weeks rather than breaking down after a few hours. The hope is that the phage-based approach will provide new weapons in the battle against dangerous bacteria such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In this segment, Ira and guests talk about bacteriophages and their place in modern medicine. Teachers, find more information about using Science Friday as a classroom resource in the Kids' Connection.

Guests
[which, for some reason, probably having to do with prejudice against creationists, do not include "Dr." Bergman (http://www.rantsnraves.org/wiki/index.php/VoxRat_on_Bergman)]

[RBH]

Gaaaah! I don't have the spare systolic capacity to read that thread title!

[ck1]

I saw this paper today and was reminded of this and previous Bergman-related discussions of viruses and whether they are "good", and can serve useful purposes. And whether scientists are ignoring viruses in their work on disease prevention and treatment.

This paper reviews the work that has been done to evaluate the use of viruses, particularly oncolytic viruses, in cancer therapy. This is not a new idea - the first citation in the paper is from 1904...

Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008 Jul;6(7):529-40.
Reprogrammed viruses as cancer therapeutics: targeted, armed and shielded.
Cattaneo R, Miest T, Shashkova EV, Barry MA.
Department of Molecular Medicine, Rochester, MayoClinic, Minnesota 55905, USA. Cattaneo.Roberto@mayo.edu

Virotherapy is currently undergoing a renaissance, based on our improved understanding of virus biology and genetics and our better knowledge of many different types of cancer. Viruses can be reprogrammed into oncolytic vectors by combining three types of modification: targeting, arming and shielding. Targeting introduces multiple layers of cancer specificity and improves safety and efficacy; arming occurs through the expression of prodrug convertases and cytokines; and coating with polymers and the sequential usage of different envelopes or capsids provides shielding from the host immune response. Virus-based therapeutics are beginning to find their place in cancer clinical practice, in combination with chemotherapy and radiation.

When viruses were first recognized more than 100 years ago, the idea of using them to fight cancer, and in particular leukaemia, was considered.....
http://www.nature.com/nrmicro/journal/v6/n7/abs/nrmicro1927.html

[Dave Hawkins]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

[RAFH]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

Oh please davey. You can't even give up gracefully when you've been obliterated. Did you even read Vox's dismantling of your hero's paper, what little there was of it.

But you are right, if you didn't make such silly assertions, Vox probably wouldn't have ever bothered to slice and dice it at all, much less so thoroughly. But you can't even see that, you are so self-blinded by your ego and Teh STOOPID. What a silly little fool you are.

[BWE]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

Well in vox and ck1 cases I'd guess they have been aware for some time. In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.

So, cool! That's why I've been sticking up for you.:wave:

[damitall]

Phages, and their various bits and pieces, have been tools for molecular biologists for decades.

Besides which, they are being used commercially to suppress contaminants in mixed bacterial cultures where the intention is to enrich a minority population.

And bioMerieux is using recombinant proteins from phages as capture agents in bacterial detection tests - they are better than antibodies, with very high afffinities and avidities (comparable to avidin-biotin), and give MUCH lower backgrounds, hence higher signal to noise ratios.

Engineered phage and their components can also help in getting antibacterial molecules inside bacteria.

The problems with using phage as antibacterial agents in humans are still centred around escape mutation in target bacteria, heterogeneity of susceptibility in the target population, and neutralising antibodies being formed by the patient.

None of this has any root whatsoever in any creationist paradigm. It's the appliance of science, taking a natural phenomenon and engineering it to be (one hopes) beneficial, even to Yeckies

[Faid]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?My Highschool Biology textbook, dave. Remember? ;)

[VoxRat]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.

[BWE]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?My Highschool Biology textbook, dave. Remember? ;)
Which is why I had to put the caveat in there. Although, I don't know if it was in my high school biology text or not. Certainly was in college though.

[BWE]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.
If it weren't so damn funny the way he sticks his foot in his mouth

(this is #2. The first time I saw him make this particular mistake was when he told Per that he thought Per had simply believed what the experts said about paleontology without critically examining it. Per gave the best answer I've ever seen on a message board. I can't find it at the moment though)

I'd try to let him have his delusion.

[BWE]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.
Official BWE post of the week sticker.

[SteveF]

Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

This is the same guy who thinks that geologists have been influenced by Morris and Whitcomb.

[Dave Hawkins]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.So ... since you say it wasn't me or Bergman that got you interested in phage therapy, no doubt you could point to previous online discussions you've had on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread? Or perhaps to some papers you've published on the topic? Or maybe you could share some personal correspondence you've had with Dr. Cattaneo on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread?

[Dave Hawkins]

BWE ... In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.Thanks. At least one honest person in the lot.

[SteveF]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.So ... since you say it wasn't me or Bergman that got you interested in phage therapy, no doubt you could point to previous online discussions you've had on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread? Or perhaps to some papers you've published on the topic? Or maybe you could share some personal correspondence you've had with Dr. Cattaneo on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread?

:confused:

[VoxRat]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.So ... since you say it wasn't me or Bergman that got you interested in phage therapy, no doubt you could point to previous online discussions you've had on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread? Or perhaps to some papers you've published on the topic? Or maybe you could share some personal correspondence you've had with Dr. Cattaneo on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread?Yes.
I could.

But I've already covered all that. Somewhere else. No, I won't tell you where.

[ck1]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

In college I became aware of Howard Temin's provirus hypothesis. He argued that retroviruses generated DNA copies that were stable components of their host cells (now termed ERVs). He was mostly ignored. It took 10 years before the scientific community caught up with him (and then they gave him the Nobel). While I was in grad school, it was shown that mice carry retrovirus copies as germline genes, and I was hooked. I did my post-doc in a virology lab to investigate this phenomenon.

[Dave Hawkins]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now. In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that). Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)

[BWE]

Dave, what you seem to lack is perspective. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Perspective_Vortex)

[Pappy Jack]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now. In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that). Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)
The Prof just can't help making stuff up to suit his argument. If Bergman was so cutting edge in 1999, then I guess this Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy) is just stuff made up by the EAC to discredit the work of creationist science:
Following the discovery of bacteriophages by Frederick Twort and Felix d'Hérelle[6] in 1915 and 1917, phage therapy was immediately recognized by many to be a key way forward for the eradication of bacterial infections.....

In neighbouring countries including Russia, extensive research and development soon began in this field. In the USA during the 1940s, commercialization of phage therapy was undertaken.....

Whilst knowledge was being accumulated regarding the biology of phages and how to use phage cocktails correctly, early uses of phage therapy were often unreliable. When antibiotics were discovered in 1941 and marketed widely in the USA and Europe, Western scientists mostly lost interest in further use and study of phage therapy for some time.....

As a result of the development of antibiotic resistance since the 1950s and an advancement of scientific knowledge, there is renewed interest worldwide in the ability of phage therapy to eradicate bacterial infections and chronic polymicrobial biofilm.....

Some of the interest in the West can be traced back to 1994, when Soothill demonstrated (in an animal model) that the use of phages could improve the success of skin grafts....

[DMB]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.
If it weren't so damn funny the way he sticks his foot in his mouth

(this is #2. The first time I saw him make this particular mistake was when he told Per that he thought Per had simply believed what the experts said about paleontology without critically examining it. Per gave the best answer I've ever seen on a message board. I can't find it at the moment though)

I'd try to let him have his delusion.

Was it this one? (http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=54627#post54627) I certainly thought the last line was brilliant!

[VoxRat]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now.Oh?
How is that "obvious"? In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that).I believe you're making stuff up again. Unless, of course by "something like that" you mean one or both of us pointed out some serious real-world limitations that you're blissfully unaware of. Actually, in "our" last discussion of this (http://www.rantsnraves.org/wiki/index.php/VoxRat_on_Bergman), you were nowhere to be found.

Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)Now it seems that you're lying again. Really a nasty habit.

[ck1]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now. In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that). Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)

Dave, Just to clarify. The term "phage" refers specifically to viruses (bacteriophages) that infect bacteria. Phage therapy deals with use of phages to control bacterial infections. The Cattaneo paper referenced above deals with use of various oncolytic animal viruses for cancer therapy.

I was aware of phage therapy before you came along, but it is not something that particularly interests me.

[damitall]

25 years ago, one of my weekly tasks was to phage-type the Staph aureus isolates made.

We also had a weekly Journal Club. At least twice, the whole area of bacteriophage as potential therapy was discussed, and there was much more informal discussion in and around the lab, since the lab Director was somethng of a specialist in anti-staphylococcal therapies.

Even then, his opinion was that it was impractical, if only because the patients form neutralising antibodies to the phage very quickly - so if more than one or two doses are needed, the virus becomes inactivated before it can infect the Staph.

And, I can tell you, we could often see phage-resistant sub-populations within the lysis plaque of suscepible cells

So, Our Hawkins, just because the potential beneficial uses of phage were new to YOU, does not mean that at least some of them were old hat to many of the rest of us.

[BWE]

Do you imagine it was you, Dave??? or Bergman???

You really do have a bloated ego, don't you!

I assure you, it wasn't.

I know Dr. Cattaneo personally. One of his students on the project mentioned above is now continuing the related work in the laboratory next door to me.
If it weren't so damn funny the way he sticks his foot in his mouth

(this is #2. The first time I saw him make this particular mistake was when he told Per that he thought Per had simply believed what the experts said about paleontology without critically examining it. Per gave the best answer I've ever seen on a message board. I can't find it at the moment though)

I'd try to let him have his delusion.

Was it this one? (http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=54627#post54627) I certainly thought the last line was brilliant!
No it wasn't that one although that was good too. In looking, I found this one (http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=53748#post53748)which amused me. No the one I was looking for was where Dave told Per that he had blindly accepted what the experts told him. Then, upon discovering the error, Dave posted that he looked forward to reading Per's next article in Nature. It was Per's response to that post that still makes me laugh to think about it.

[Dave Hawkins]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.

[BWE]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.
The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!

[Mike PSS]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.
The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!
Dave suffers from a rare form of foot-in-mouth disease where he cannot taste or feel feet in his own mouth.

[BWE]

Just when you think you can't laugh at any more posts, along comes Mike proving there's always another laugh.

[Coleslaw]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.

Really? Per actually admitted he has never looked at fossils on his own and that he made up the many papers he has published?

Funny, I remember it differently.

[VoxRat]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.

Really? Per actually admitted he has never looked at fossils on his own and that he made up the many papers he has published?

Funny, I remember it differently.Oh, yes!
Dave explained it all clearly.
And, no, he won't tell you where.

[BWE]

There was no error. I was correct on this point.
The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!
Dave suffers from a rare form of foot-in-mouth disease where he cannot taste or feel feet in his own mouth.
You'd think that at some point he would get down to other organs that he should feel in his own mouth.

[BWE]

Realizing that it is a different issue, thinking of this topic made me think of this one. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070503094447.htm)

ScienceDaily (May 5, 2007) — University of Manchester researchers are ridding diabetic patients of the superbug MRSA - by treating their foot ulcers with maggots. Professor Andrew Boulton and his team used green bottle fly larvae to treat 13 diabetic patients whose foot ulcers were contaminated with MRSA and found all but one were cured within a mean period of three weeks, much quicker than the 28-week duration for the conventional treatment.

further on,
"Still, we were very surprised to see such a good result for MRSA. There is no reason this cannot be applied to many other areas of the body, except perhaps a large abdominal wound."
Oh.:eek:

[Dave Hawkins]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.

[Faid]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee50/kurtenblog/roflmao.jpg

[Faid]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.And you know all this because....?

Dave, where do you think paleos find fossils? Do they stay in their offices, as the EAC delivers packages of bones to them by courier? With a "Hail Darwin" stamp?

Your arrogance really knows no bounds, does it?

[JonF]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side.
Which is irrelevant.

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.
No, as he explicitly posted, his view comes primarily from things he learned in school and afterwards, including extensive field experience in general geology.

Wrong again, Davie-doodles.

[Notta_skeptic]

BWE ... In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.Thanks. At least one honest person in the lot.
And all the textbooks prove you (Dave) wrong. Thanks!

[BWE]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side.

That is not a requirement for expertise in paleontology, only for expertise in individual creationist arguments. There is no coherent creationist position AFAIK.

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. Funny, I think you'd find the exact opposite. In fact, though there are only a few places where I'm comfortable describing specific geology, I think my own firsthand experience through my own geology field trips in college and the local ones I've included in specific lesson plans I designed give me, an absolute generalist on the subject, firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. You see Dave, it's called observation. It only requires that you observe the evidence (have you gone to look at Elka's paleosols yet?) and weigh it against the various scenarios to eliminate the impossible ones... like the flood for example.

It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.The first bold is conjecture and the second one uses it as fact. Can you see why that might make you look silly? Or more specifically, make you look like a victim of morton's demon? You know Glenn Morton don't you Dave? The professional Geologist who tried to explain various burrows to you? The one you showed blatant disrespect toward? The one who wrote the Morton's Demon essay? The essay I talked about in the last two posts in the dendro debate? You know the dendro debate? The one where you asked for Data? You know the Data? The data that I provided? The data that you couldn't read without software? You know the software? The software I provided that you couldn't use? Remember how you couldn't use it so you asked me to show you how? Remember how I showed you how? Remember how you still didn't do it but instead wrote:
THE FERGUSON CHRONOLOGY, UPON WHICH ALL SUBSEQUENT TREE RING CHRONOLOGIES IS BASED IS VERY LIKELY BUILT UPON FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ... AND THUS IS PROBABLY WRONG

This is what it looks like, folks ...
and I only say "very likely" because PROVING this is very difficult and time consuming.
See, people saved you some time Dave. They already did it. It turns out it works. Remember Yamaguchi? The one who figured out the wiggle matching thing that turns out to demonstrate dendro's accuracy rather than its failures? The one that illustrated why your creo authors were intentionally lying?

Well, I remember. And that is some of the evidence that I use in assessing the content of your claim quoted in this post.

[BWE]

BWE ... In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.Thanks. At least one honest person in the lot.
And all the textbooks prove you (Dave) wrong. Thanks!
Often the irony in my posts seems to go unnoticed. I think maybe I'm too subtle.

[Susannah]

So ... since you say it wasn't me or Bergman that got you interested in phage therapy, no doubt you could point to previous online discussions you've had on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread? Or perhaps to some papers you've published on the topic? Or maybe you could share some personal correspondence you've had with Dr. Cattaneo on this topic prior to my earliest Bergman thread?Yes.
I could.

But I've already covered all that. Somewhere else. No, I won't tell you where.

Playing with fire, Vox? Davey is going to quote you on that.
:D

[ck1]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.

Dave, Per specifically replied to your claim that he uncritically accepts things he was taught in school in this comment:

http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=52168#post52168

Did you read it?

Also, you keep forgetting something - there is no "other side". At least no other side that offers real-world explanations for the "larger geological picture", or for the roles played by viruses in labs or in nature.

What incentive can you offer working scientists to read creationist books (other than to prepare for political skirmishes).

[Pappy Jack]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.
Do you ever feel ashamed of posting ignorant bile, Prof?

[RAFH]

There was no error. I was correct on this point.
The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!
Dave suffers from a rare form of foot-in-mouth disease where he cannot taste or feel feet in his own mouth.

Are you sure it's not just that he likes the taste and feel of his feet in his mouth, particularly the toe jam? This is my own pet theory, that davey actually likes toe jam. So much he jams his toes in his mouth when and where ever he can.

[Mike PSS]

BWE ... In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.Thanks. At least one honest person in the lot.And all the textbooks prove you (Dave) wrong. Thanks!
Often the irony in my posts seems to go unnoticed. I think maybe I'm too subtle.


The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!
Dave suffers from a rare form of foot-in-mouth disease where he cannot taste or feel feet in his own mouth.

Are you sure it's not just that he likes the taste and feel of his feet in his mouth, particularly the toe jam? This is my own pet theory, that davey actually likes toe jam. So much he jams his toes in his mouth when and where ever he can.
As outlined above, I'm pretty sure he's unaware.

[VoxRat]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.
But... Dave!

I went to the trouble of reading the "landmark" Whitcomb & Morris "Genesis Flood" - and you're not willing to discuss it at all.*

And you still haven't read any real world books on any of the relevant science, so far as I can tell. It appears to me that you just uncritically accept things you were taught in Sunday school, and have a literal phobia about even looking at real-world science.

*ETA: I forgot which thread I was posting it, but now that I notice: you refused to engage in a serious discussion of Bergman's "groundbreaking" virology when I dissected that. I not only acquainted myself with all the creationist literature on the topic, but I am a working virologist with lots of first-hand, hands-on experience.

And you STILL won't discuss these issues with me.

Why is that?

[Coleslaw]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.
Do you ever feel ashamed of posting ignorant bile, Prof?

Apparently not. One assumes that if he did he'd stop posting it.

[Pappy Jack]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.
Do you ever feel ashamed of posting ignorant bile, Prof?

Apparently not. One assumes that if he did he'd stop posting it.
It was a rhetorical question ;). As you point out, nothing has slowed him down so far; if he was going to be ashamed by anything - and there's quite a lot to be ashamed of when you add up the evasions, question-dodging, quotemining and handwaving - he would surely have manifested some symptoms long since.

[Steviepinhead]

No matter how much trouble Dave is already in trying to explain his creationist views on however many existing threads, he's always willing to dig himself in even deeper on some brand new topic on some brand new thread, all while simultaneously resurrecting even older trouble that he's gotten himself into on moribund threads on fora he no longer frequents.

I'm sure this is just a corollary to one of the extant DaveLaws.

But I kinda like it anyway.

[ericmurphy]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

Well, I first became aware of the use of the tobacco mosaic virus as a vector for inserting DNA in cells when I first read about recombinant DNA. That would have been my sophomore year in high school, say, late 1977-early 1978.

When did Bergman's literature review paper come out, Dave?

[ericmurphy]

Dave, what you seem to lack is perspective. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Perspective_Vortex)

Or, perspective (http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf).

[VoxRat]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

Well, I first became aware of the use of the tobacco mosaic virus as a vector for inserting DNA in cells when I first read about recombinant DNA. That would have been my sophomore year in high school, say, late 1977-early 1978.mmmm...
maybe not.
Tobacco Mosaic Virus is an RNA virus.
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, maybe?

[ericmurphy]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.

Dave, how much first-hand knowledge do YOU have about the "larger geological picture"? None. There's no evidence that you've ever even seen any geology.

Apparently, everything you "know" comes from what you were taught to believe.

Which puts Per far, far ahead of you.

[ericmurphy]

Yes ... the idea of viruses being useful has been around quite a while ... but not in everyone's minds. What caused you to become interested in this topic, Vox? CK1? Hmmm?

Well, I first became aware of the use of the tobacco mosaic virus as a vector for inserting DNA in cells when I first read about recombinant DNA. That would have been my sophomore year in high school, say, late 1977-early 1978.mmmm...
maybe not.
Tobacco Mosaic Virus is an RNA virus.
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, maybe?

Hmm…maybe that's not the virus they were talking about. But I definitely remember a discussion of using viruses in recombinant DNA technology, oh, about 30 years ago.

[VoxRat]

Well, I first became aware of the use of the tobacco mosaic virus as a vector for inserting DNA in cells when I first read about recombinant DNA. That would have been my sophomore year in high school, say, late 1977-early 1978.mmmm...
maybe not.
Tobacco Mosaic Virus is an RNA virus.
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, maybe?

Hmm…maybe that's not the virus they were talking about. But I definitely remember a discussion of using viruses in recombinant DNA technology, oh, about 30 years ago.Do you remember whether they talking about plant or animal cells? (Probably not bacterial, because that was old news by then.)

[BWE]

mmmm...
maybe not.
Tobacco Mosaic Virus is an RNA virus.
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, maybe?

Hmm…maybe that's not the virus they were talking about. But I definitely remember a discussion of using viruses in recombinant DNA technology, oh, about 30 years ago.Do you remember whether they talking about plant or animal cells? (Probably not bacterial, because that was old news by then.)
30 years ago might more of a Monsanto approach than Merck. I don't know but just in case it turns out not to be medicine. Now I'm curious.

[ericmurphy]

mmmm...
maybe not.
Tobacco Mosaic Virus is an RNA virus.
Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, maybe?

Hmm…maybe that's not the virus they were talking about. But I definitely remember a discussion of using viruses in recombinant DNA technology, oh, about 30 years ago.Do you remember whether they talking about plant or animal cells? (Probably not bacterial, because that was old news by then.)

As I recall (and yes, high school was a long time ago for me), they were talking about inserting genes into the tomato genome. I can't remember what the purpose was—it might have been to confer pest—or pesticide—resistance, or maybe it was to get rid of that extra "e" you sometimes see on a tomatoe.

[Steviepinhead]

Ah, yes, the famous eless gene. I'd forgotten about that one... I ded remember the iless gene (though it might have been spelled differently in my memory).

After testing it on produce, did they move on up to quail?

[David B]

There was no error. I was correct on this point.
The error that Per is the experts you frickin %$#@$!**!@#!
Dave suffers from a rare form of foot-in-mouth disease where he cannot taste or feel feet in his own mouth.

Or detect bite marks on his feet.

David B

[espritch]

Per admitted that the only creationist book he's ever read was a little bit of a Gish book. So he really is poorly informed about the other side. And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically. Which, of course, is as I thought.

The level or arrogance, ignorance, and just plain stupid demonstrated in this post truly boggles the mind. :eek:

[Coragyps]

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically.

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.

[VoxRat]

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.And that's no joke!
Seriously, Dave, you may not believe this, but we may be the best friends you have in this world, and we're seriously concerned!

This condition has been known to be fatal! http://youtube.com/watch?v=nTcA0D2GcT4&feature=related]

[RAFH]

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.And that's no joke!
Seriously, Dave, you may not believe this, but we may be the best friends you have in this world, and we're seriously concerned!

This condition has been known to be fatal! http://youtube.com/watch?v=nTcA0D2GcT4&feature=related]

That's fabulous Vox, one of the best videos I've seen in a long time. Gad, that guy is perfect, I sort of think he's heavily made up, perhaps one of those masks. And the backup group, it was perfect how they were totally out of sync with their snapping. Perfect. All backed-up. Yeah!

[VoxRat]

That's fabulous Vox, one of the best videos I've seen in a long time. Gad, that guy is perfect, I sort of think he's heavily made up, perhaps one of those masks. And the backup group, it was perfect how they were totally out of sync with their snapping. Perfect. All backed-up. Yeah!It's Harry Shearer (http://www.harryshearer.com/), the voice behind Mr. Burns, Smithers, Ned Flanders, Rev. Lovejoy and others on The Simpsons; Derek Smalls of Spinal Tap, host of Le Show and one of the greatest comic geniuses of our time.

I don't know for sure if that's Shearer in makeup and fat suit (I guess so) or an actor.

[RAFH]

It would have been better, if a little less tasteful, if he'd had his bellbottoms around his ankles while he was on the stool. That woulda been perfection. With maybe a little toot at the end. Just a hint of relief.

[VoxRat]

... With maybe a little toot at the end. Just a hint of relief.Ah, but that would have been historically inaccurate. It was the lack of relief - the "straining at stool" - that actually did The King in.

[RAFH]

... With maybe a little toot at the end. Just a hint of relief.Ah, but that would have been historically inaccurate. It was the lack of relief - the "straining at stool" - that actually did The King in.

I said, toot, meaning a gaseous outburst, not a solid mass.

I've been 'all backed up' but even then could manage my fair contribution to global warming.

[Dave Hawkins]

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically.

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.Why do you say that? What have you read of Per's work that makes you thing I'm wrong in this opinion?

[JonF]

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically.

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.Why do you say that? What have you read of Per's work that makes you thing I'm wrong in this opinion?
Why, here (http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=50626#post50626), of course, and following:

I adopted the mainstream view because the reasoning behind it was carefully explained, it didn't violate any laws of physics, and what I saw in the field made sense in terms of it. A major part of an academic geology training at Cambridge is practical fieldwork where the students are set the task of examining and interpreting particular geological features. All of this is based on explicit chains of reasoning: what are the structures like? - what do we know about processes that can produce such structures? - what can we infer to have happened in this particular case? Furthermore, I knew that the mainstream view (or rather spectrum of views) had emerged from a constant process of critical discussion and peer review going back nearly two hundred years. Dramatic changes in outlook have occurred during those two hundred years, including the rejection of the young-earth creationist perspectives that were initially prevalent among specialists in the field but had to be abandoned because the evidence just didn't support them. I have read bits and pieces of the modern creationist literature (a friend at college once lent me Gish's "Evolution: The Fossils Say No", and I have leafed through a few others as well) but have found them to be calamitously deficient in logic and full of obviously false assertions.
{emphasis added}

So, not only is your claim of "[little] firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture" false, your claim that Gish is the only creationist literature he's read is false.

Pretty much SOP for Davie-gorp.

[ninewands]

BWE ... In my case Dave, you were the catalyst that first caused me to read any science outside of textbooks on the subject.Thanks. At least one honest person in the lot.
But notice, Dave, BWE said it was YOU who inspired him to read SCIENCE outside his textbooks. We can both guess what the new, improved, better-informed BWE's opinion of Bergman's crap was after the fact, can't we?

[BWE]

How can one man shoot himself in the foot so often and survive when the feet are so firmly embedded inside his mouth? I just don't get it.

[ninewands]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now. In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that). Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)
Dave, I was aware of early phage therapy work in the Soviet Union back in the 1960's (I think it was 1968, when I was a sophomore taking Microbiology that I first heard of it) ... I guess my point with this post is a one word question ... "SO?"

[ninewands]

upon discovering the errorThere was no error. I was correct on this point.
Dave,
I hope you are aware that Per is one of the top four or five people in the WORLD in the field (fish-tetrapod transition) in which he works. Let's see, there's Per, Jenny Clack, Shubin, Daschler ... that's about it off the top of my head.

[VoxRat]

Alright, so both CK1 and Vox were aware of phage therapy. But obviously you haven't been very interested in it until now. In fact, I think in our last discussion you both said it's fringe and not worth pursuing (or something like that). Now it seems you may be changing your mind. Why the change? (And don't forget ... Bergman had already figured out that it was worth pursuing back in 1999.)
Bergman "figured out that it was worth pursuing"???

Bergman gives exactly one reference to the whole therapeutic bacteriophage idea: this 1996 article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_n11_v17/ai_18762287) in the pop-science magazine Discover (that's right; the same magazine that gave us the Turkey Guts lead).

Yep. Real "cutting-edge", this "Dr." Bergman guy!

:rolleyes:

[ninewands]

And you STILL won't discuss these issues with me.

Why is that?
Dave obviously doesn't want to talk with scientists on subjects within their field of expertise. Threfore, he wants to discuss Biology with Lizzie, geological subjects with Jet Black, etc., etc., etc. I wonder if it could be because Michael Tuite did such a wonderfully thorough job of slice 'n dice on him in the "Turkey Guts/Oil" thread?

[VoxRat]

And you STILL won't discuss these issues with me.

Why is that?
Dave obviously doesn't want to talk with scientists on subjects within their field of expertise. Threfore, he wants to discuss Biology with Lizzie, geological subjects with Jet Black, etc., etc., etc. I wonder if it could be because Michael Tuite did such a wonderfully thorough job of slice 'n dice on him in the "Turkey Guts/Oil" thread?
Nah.
His reluctance to talk to me predates that.
Apparently it's because he's decided that I'm very dishonest, and, no, he won't tell you where. (http://www.talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=2990)

[ericmurphy]

And while he has expertise in Devonian tetrapods, I don't think you'll find that he has much firsthand knowledge of the larger geological picture. It appears that his view comes primarily from things he was taught in school and accepted uncritically.

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.Why do you say that? What have you read of Per's work that makes you thing I'm wrong in this opinion?

Dave, how could you possibly know, or even suspect, the bolded part above from Per's writings (and which of his writings have YOU actually read?). How would you know whether or not Mr. Ahlberg "accepted uncritically" those teachings?

Are you a mind-reader now too, on top of all your other gifts?

[Coragyps]

Why do you say that? What have you read of Per's work that makes you thing I'm wrong in this opinion?

It wasn't just one thing, Dave. I've thought that you're that full of it ever since about two days after you showed up at Infidels. And every time you post something like "Portland cement is mostly calcium carbonate" you confirm it some more.

[RAFH]

wow. dave, you are fuller of shit than rush limbaugh, ann coulter, and the bombay, india sewage plant combined.Why do you say that? What have you read of Per's work that makes you thing I'm wrong in this opinion?

Dave, how could you possibly know, or even suspect, the bolded part above from Per's writings (and which of his writings have YOU actually read?). How would you know whether or not Mr. Ahlberg "accepted uncritically" those teachings?

Are you a mind-reader now too, on top of all your other gifts?

No, but Jebus is and between Jebus and gawd, they know everything, even stuff Santa doesn't know about, and of course, davey has a direct line to both of them at all times. So, he's totally informed about everything. Ain'tcha davey boy? Like you know about about the babble being wrong about the dates it lists despite it being absolutely inerrant. Oh wait, that's when you got damned to HELL for your blasphemy and heresy. Aw too bad, specially about the unborn great grandchildren. Bet they'll be pissed when they find out they are pre-damned as well, all because you are an arrogant, prideful egotistical idiot. I wonder if they'll piss on your grave. Bet they do, once they find out you were the one that damned them to HELL for all eternity.

Man, I'd hate to have that hanging over my head. Bad enough you have to go to HELL and burn but then you have to face your great grandchildren and try to explain to them why they are there as well. Good luck davey, you're going to need it.