We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait
and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at
this time when everyone has 20:20 hindsight into what happened. This is
just a history of what the ID scam has been. I've refrained from using
perps and rubes, so there isn't that excuse for remaining willfully
ignorant. It is all anyone should need to understand what has been
going on with the ID scam for over 20 years.

Investopedia:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bait-switch.asp
QUOTE:
Bait and switch is a morally suspect sales tactic that lures customers
in with specific claims about the quality or low prices on items that
turn out to be unavailable in order to upsell them on a similar, pricier
item.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Bait and switch tactics are often considered to be a type of fraud, and therefore is illegal. Bait and switch scams can fall under a number of violations, from breach of contract to false advertising.
END QUOTE:

The Discovery Institute is not running the bait and switch scam on the
science side of the issue. They run the bait and switch on the Biblical creationists that want to support the Discovery Institute's CRSC/CSC religious-political mission.

It should be noted that the Discovery Institute fellows who have been participating in the bait and switch, have claimed that the Wedge
Document was just a "fund raising" document as an excuse for their
religious political goals being in their Wedge Strategy. This point is
not being made to label the Discovery Institute as a criminal
organization, but to present the obvious conclusion that the Discovery Institute has not only used their claims of being able to teach their intelligent design science in the public schools to attract the
creationist support in order to sell them their obfuscation and denial
switch scam (an alternative that the Discovery Institute claims has
nothing to do with their intelligent design science) but they have also
used the teach ID political ploy to obtain funding.

The Wedge document may have been written in 1998, and exposed in 1999,
it repeats the original mission statement of the Discovery Institute's
Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (the ID scam unit) and also
claims teaching ID in the public schools as one of their 5 year Wedge goals. The Wedge document:
https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf

One of their 5 year goals:
QUOTE:
Ten states begin to rectify ideological imbalance in their science
curricula & include design theory
END QUOTE

It is just a fact that when the Discovery Institute had convinced states
to teach ID they began running the bait and switch instead of following
through with their stated Wedge strategy. The Discovery Institute had
secured enough notoriety so that they not only had to run the bait and
switch on Ohio in March 2002, but there were 3 or 4 other states within
the next month or two that had the bait and switch run on them. I
recall Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Montana also came forward and wanted to
teach intelligent design in their public schools. The Discovery
Institute would have been well on their way to meeting their 5 year
goals, but they started running the bait and switch instead.

In politics the bait and switch is morally suspect, but not illegal
because the perpetrator can always claim that they just changed their
minds, but in the case of the ID scam, after changing their minds, they continued to sell intelligent design as the bait to this day. So after
Ohio in 2002 all the subsequent bait and switch incidences were enacted
after the Discovery Institute's CRSC fellows had changed their minds
about being able to teach ID in the public schools.

The Thomas More lawyer defending the Dover ID creationists was fully
aware that the bait and switch was being run by the Discovery Institute,
but he called it a "strategy". The bait and switch is a political
strategy, but is morally bankrupt, and dishonest.

http://ncse.com/news/2005/10/discovery-institute-thomas-more-law-center-squabble-aei-foru-00704

QUOTE:
So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a
compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we thought we could present
END QUOTE:

The so called "compromise" is the current obfuscation and denial teach
the controversy switch scam. For political-legal reasons the Discovery Institute tells their creationist supporters that this switch scam has
nothing to do with ID. They tell this lie even though teaching ID in
the public schools was part of the original teach the controversy plan.

The bait and switch had gone down dozens of times before the Dover
fiasco hit the fan, and not a single group of creationist ID supporters
were given any ID science to teach in their public schools. The bait
and switch has gone down in every single instance.

During the Dover fiasco after Barbara Forrest was deposed (Dembski was
present at the deposition) for Kitzmiller, the Discovery Institute
fellows knew that the name switch from creationism to intelligent design
was going to be exposed, and half of them quit as expert witnesses.
Forrest had evidence that "Of Pandas and People" had been transformed
from a creationist textbook to intelligent design after the Supreme
Court decision that creation science wasn't any type of science that
could be taught in the public schools. Thaxton was the editor, Kenyon
was one of the two main authors. Behe admitted to writing some of
Pandas' later edition, but was not credited. Meyer had written the
teachers notes for the textbook, and Dembski was then editing the next
edition of Pandas. The drafts of Dembski's book had also been
subpoenaed, but the subpoena was dropped when Dembski ran away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Pandas_and_People

Everyone should read the NCSE archive of the Thomas More lawyer incident because it has the Discovery Institute rep lying about the Discovery
Institute claiming to be able to teach ID in the public schools, and the
More lawyer had to demonstrate that, that was a lie by pulling the
booklet on teaching ID in the public schools out of his pocket and
quoting from it. This was the booklet that the Discovery Institute used
to give out with their ID Wedge video before they started running the
bait and switch in 2002. In 2005 this booklet was still available in
pdf form for free when the Dover fiasco was occurring.

https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58

This link will take you back to a Discovery Institute web page to
download their Teach the Controversy strategy. I accessed this web page
by looking at what Wayback had backed up of the Discovery Institute web
site in mid 2005. Teaching ID was part of their "Teach the Controversy"
Wedge strategy before they started running the bait and switch on
creationist ID supporters. You can "click here" and download a pdf of
the booklet that the Thomas More lawyer quoted from. The material was
still available on the Discovery Institute web site during the Dover fiasco.

The Dover creationists had followed their recommendations in obtaining
"Of Pandas and People" to teach the ID science.

From the Conclusions:
QUOTE:
Local school boards and state education officials are frequently
pressured to avoid teaching the controversy regarding biological
origins. Indeed, many groups, such as the National Academy of Sciences,
go so far as to deny the existence of any genuine scientific controversy
about the issue.(162) Nevertheless, teachers should be reassured that
they have the right to expose their students to the problems as well as
the appeal of Darwinian theory. Moreover, as the previous discussion demonstrates, school boards have the authority to permit, and even
encourage, teaching about design theory as an alternative to Darwinian evolution--and this includes the use of textbooks such as Of Pandas and
People that present evidence for the theory of intelligent design.
END QUOTE:

Original mission statement of the Discovery Institute CRSC (Center for
Renewal of Science and Culture): http://web.archive.org/web/19980114111554/http://discovery.org/crsc/aboutcrsc.html

QUOTE:
THE proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one
of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. Its influence can be detected in most, if not all, of the West's greatest achievements, including representative democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and progress in the arts and sciences.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture
seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its damning
cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural
sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center
explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science
raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the
case for the supernatural. The Center awards fellowships for original
research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the
opportunities for life after materialism.
END QUOTE:

If you use the above link you should note the Discovery Institute's logo
of God and Adam. There was no doubt that the mission was a
religious-political mission. This is the mission that the fellows of
the CRSC signed up to accomplish. This is likely the mission that they
are currently trying to fulfill by continuing to use ID as bait.

You should notice that developing real intelligent design science is not
part of the CRSC fellow's mission. To accomplish this mission the
fellows have been prevaricating about being able to do the same science
as everyone else in order to demonstrate the existence of their
intelligent designer when their mission was to actually undermine a
basic component of real science. Science can only work for things that
we can determine actually exist. This is not the philosophical
materialism that the CRSC fellows want to combat, but they lump it in
with what they do not like. Science is just the best means that we have figured out to understand nature, and it turned out that any ID science
that they wanted to accomplish would have just demonstrated that nature
wasn't the Biblical creation described in the Bible. This is the reason
why the Top Six presented in the order in which they must have logically occurred in this universe killed ID on TO back in Nov. 2017. The
Biblical creationists supporting the ID scam on TO could not deal with
the reality that the Top Six represented. The designer that filled
those gaps was not their Biblical designer, and most of them quit
supporting the ID scam.

Intelligent design was a part of the Wedge strategy to accomplish their religious-political mission.

The Wedge document:
https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf

Phillip Johnson has claimed that getting ID taught in the public schools
was part of the Wedge Strategy to achieve the religious-political goals
of the Discovery Institute's CRSC Mission Statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy

QUOTE:
Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the
issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God,
before the academic world and into the schools.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
The wedge strategy details a simultaneous assault on state boards of
education, state and federal legislatures and on the print and broadcast media.[33] The Discovery Institute has carried out the strategy through
its role in the intelligent design movement, where it aggressively
promoted ID and its Teach the Controversy campaign to the public,
education officials and public policymakers.[34] Intelligent design
proponents, through the Discovery Institute, have employed a number of
specific political strategies and tactics in their furtherance of their
goals. These range from attempts at the state level to undermine or
remove altogether the presence of evolutionary theory from the public
school classroom, to having the federal government mandate the teaching
of intelligent design, to 'stacking' municipal, county and state school
boards with ID proponents.[35]
END QUOTE:

TO participants that were posting in the 1990's should recall that
intelligent design first came to our attention as something that the anti-evolution Biblical creationists wanted to teach in the public
schools. Initially teaching intelligent design was a major part of the
Teach the Controversy political ploy, but they dropped ID out of their
Teach the Controversy material after they started running the bait and
switch. The Teach the Controversy ploy became the switch scam, and
wasn't supposed to mention that ID had ever existed. You can just go
back up to the conclusions of their 1999 public school ID propaganda
quoted above to note that ID was definitely part of the original Teach
the Controversy strategy. The title of the booklet is "Teaching the Controversy: Darwinism, Design and the Public School Science
Curriculum". By continuing to use ID as bait, they are just continuing
with their original mission.

When the bait and switch started to go down Johnson retired from his ARN
ID Blog one month later. He did not give up on teaching ID in the
public schools, and he came back to support the Dover effort. Johnson
sat in the Federal courtroom every day of testimony. After that Johnson
quit supporting teaching ID in the public schools and admitted that the
ID science had never existed. The Discovery Institute doubled down
after Dover and put out their current teach ID propaganda even after
Phillip Johnson's admission. The Discovery Institute intelligent design
Wedge advocates could not give up on using ID as bait. The obfuscation
and denial switch scam was their only way forward with their Wedge
goals, and the creationist ID supporters were not interested in the
obfuscation and denial switch scam. They needed to keep using
Intelligent design as bait to dishonestly garner creationist support for
their Wedge goals. All the Discovery Institute ID fellows accepted this
as the way forward in trying to achieve their Wedge goals. None of the
fellows at the Discovery Institute have ever protested the bait and
switch strategy, nor resigned because of it. Probably most of the
current fellows that have signed up after Kitzmiller, signed up knowing
that bait is all they could expect ID to be used for. None of them have
ever produced any legitimate ID science nor have they tried to create
something positive from their "best evidence" for intelligent design.

Phillip Johnson's admissions about intelligent design Spring 2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20070609171527/http:/sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles/issue10/evolution.pdf

QUOTE:
I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design
at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the
Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully
worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s
comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific
people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
For his part, Johnson agrees: "I think the fat lady has sung for any
efforts to change the approach in the public schools…the courts are just
not going to allow it. They never have. The efforts to change things in
the public schools generate more powerful opposition than accomplish anything…I don’t think that means the end of the issue at all."
END QUOTE:

Even after Johnson made these admissions the Discovery Institute
continued to use ID as bait:
https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/

If you download their current edition of this teach ID propaganda (they
have updated it around every 3 years since producing it after
Kitzmiller) you will find their Science Education Policy that they put
up on their web site after Kitzmiller. It claims that there is a
legitimate scientific theory of ID to teach in the public schools, but
they do not want ID "required" to be taught. In 2013 both Louisiana and
Texas wanted to use their "Teach the Controversy" switch scam to teach
ID in their public schools, and both states claimed that they were not requiring teaching ID, but were only providing the teachers with the
means to teach the material if they wanted to. The Discovery Institute
ran the bait and switch on both states again, and reminded them that the
switch scam had nothing to do with ID. The Discovery Institute removed
this paragraph from the Science Education policy then up on their web
page, but you can still find the intact education policy on page 15 of
their current teach ID propaganda.

QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:

They simply deleted this paragraph from their education policy on their
web site, left the rest intact, and continued to use ID as bait. Their
bogus claim of not "requiring" ID to be taught had just been an excuse
for using ID as the bait and never giving their creationist supporters
any ID science to teach.

There should be no doubt that the Discovery Institute intelligent design advocates have been perpetrating the bait and switch scam on creationist
ID supporters for over 20 years (since March 2002).

They last updated their teach ID propaganda in 2021, but subsequently reformatted the site and seem to have reverted to the 2018 edition.

The Discovery Institute has a new Science Education Policy up where the "required" denial returns front and center, so that ID can be used as
the bait, but the policy is heavily pushing the obfuscation and denial
switch scam. They are literally running the bait and switch on the
rubes with their current education policy. The rubes have obviously
come in to get the ID science, but now they are told, obliquely, that
they do not want to teach the ID science, but there is this nifty
obfuscation and denial stupidity that they should teach instead. After
the bait and switch on both Louisiana and Texas when they were not
"requiring" ID to be taught, everyone should know that this is just
their continued efforts to use ID as bait. They have no intention of
providing any ID science for anyone to teach in the public schools.

https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/

They have not retracted their claims about having the ID science to
teach in the public schools, and one thing that you will notice is that
both Louisiana and Texas have had to have the bait and switch run on
them again after bending over for the switch scam (twice for Louisiana).
This means that those two states only adopted the the switch scam as a
means to keep trying to teach creationism in their public schools. No
one likes the switch scam, and all the states mentioned have never
really implemented it. Ohio was the only state to not only bend over
for the switch scam, but actually try to implement it without trying to
teach creationism, and they dropped the whole deal after Kitzmiller.
None of the other states mentioned never seemed to have implemented
their policy changes, at least, they have never put out how a teacher
was supposed to implement the policies. No lesson plans, and no
teaching materials have been provided to get the switch scam obfuscation
and denial taught. The creationists really do not want to teach their
kids enough science for them to understand what they have to deny.

It should be noted that the ID Network quit the ID scam back in 2009.
Their web site remained dormant until a message appeared that you could
look for them as COPE. COPE was their effort to get the switch scam
taught in the public schools without having ID in the name of their organization. COPE was a failure, and I do not recall any instances
where the ID Network was able to sell anyone the switch scam through
that organization. The ID Network is back using ID as bait, and they
admit that COPE was their effort. The Biblical creationists were not interested in the switch scam, and did not want to teach their kids
enough science for them to understand what they have to deny if they can
not tell them why they have to deny the science.

http://intelligentdesignnetwork.org/about/

I can't recall when they founded COPE, but their history claims that it
was in 2011. After the COPE efforts failed they fired up the ID Network
again.

It should be noted that in all the years that the Discovery Institute
has advocated teaching intelligent design in the public schools they
have never produced a public school lesson plan demonstrating that they
had any ID science to teach, how the subject would be taught, what
materials a teacher could use to teach the subject, and how the students
would be evaluated on what they should have learned. Before they
started running the bait and switch they recommended using "Of Pandas
and People" to teach intelligent design, but they stopped doing that
after Kitzmiller for obvious reasons.

The Discovery Institute used to have someone whose job it was to make
sure that the bait and switch went down on any creationist school boards
or legislators that wanted to teach the ID science. That person was
running the Bait and Switch on the Utah creationists back in Nov. 2017
when the Discovery Institute was putting out their Top Six best
evidences for ID. She left the Discovery Institute, and I don't know if
they replaced her.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/dear-utah-teach-about-the-scientific-controversy-over-evolution-not-about-intelligent-design/

QUOTE:
SARAH CHAFFEE
Now a teacher, Sarah Chaffee served as Program Officer in Education and
Public Policy at Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Let’s be clear: We think that Utah should not include intelligent design
in their science standards. Our Science Education Policy states:

As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to
require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state
boards of education….

…. Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public
K-12 schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of
evolution in curricula. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely presented to students, and they should learn more about
evolutionary theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words,
evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to
critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
END QUOTE:

The Texas and Lousiana examples demonstrates how the Discovery Institute
is actually using their "requiring" recommendation.

Anyone wonder why she isn't quoting from the their "Educator's Briefing
Packet" where the Discovery Institute sold the Utah creationists on
teaching ID in the first place?

From the Briefing Packet, link given previously:
QUOTE:
Has ID Been Banned from Public Schools?

No. Science teachers have the right to teach science.
Since ID is a legitimate scientific theory, it should be
constitutional to discuss in science classrooms and it
should not be banned from schools. If a science teacher
wants to voluntarily discuss ID, she should have the
academic freedom to do so.
END QUOTE:

In the Kitzmiller Wiki the Discovery Institute person responsible for
running the bait and switch at the time that the Dover fiasco hit the
fan was named as Seth Cooper.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

QUOTE:
This story made the York newspapers, and Buckingham was telephoned by
Discovery Institute staff attorney Seth Cooper, whose tasks included "communicating with legislators, school board members, teachers, parents
and students" to "address the topic of ID in a scientifically and
educationally responsible way" in public schools. He later stated that
he made the call to "steer the Dover Board away from trying to include intelligent design in the classroom or from trying to insert creationism
into its cirriculum [sic]", an account Buckingham has disputed. Cooper
sent the book and DVD of Icons of Evolution to Buckingham, who required
the Dover High School science teachers to watch the DVD. They did not
take up the opportunity to use it in their classes.
END QUOTE:

Cooper's job had likely become routine. The bait and switch had gone
down dozens of times by the time Dover hit the fan, and it was common
knowledge that the Discovery Institute was running the bait and switch.
No one had ever gotten any ID science to teach for 3 years. It was
likely that it only took one phone call to make the creationists realize
that they did not want to teach ID if the guys that sold them the scam
were telling them not to do it, but Cooper screwed up and did not follow
up and make sure that the Dover creationists had gotten that message. He
had run into a group of creationists just as dishonest as the Discovery Institute ID fellows, but too ignorant to realize that the ID bait and
switch scam had come from the Discovery Institute, and that they were disregarding the advice of the scam artists who had been selling ID as
bait to the public.

This reality is never going to change and all of you can look back on
what the Discovery Institute has been doing since starting to run the
bait and switch back in March 2002. By 2002 the ID perps were best
known for wanting to teach their ID science in the public schools and
the Wedge document, and Phillip Johnson claimed that getting ID taught
was part of their Wedge strategy, but when it came time to put up or
shut up they decided to start running the bait and switch. They could
not stop using ID as the bait because most Biblical creationists can't
stand the obfuscation and denial switch scam if they can't tell the
students why they have to deny the science.

Jonathan Wells participated in the first bait and switch on the Ohio
State Board of Education, and part of his job was to write up a report
on the incident. This is a WayBack archive of that report.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110814145400/http://www.creationists.org/archived-obsolete-pages/2002-03-11-OSBE-wells.html


QUOTE:
Steve Meyer and I (in consultation with others) had decided ahead of
time that we would not push for including intelligent design (ID) in the
state science standards, but would propose instead that the standards
include language protecting teachers who choose to teach the controversy.
END QUOTE:

Meyer was not only the director of the CRSC of the Discovery Institute,
but was one of the chief cheerleaders for teaching ID in the public
schools, and one of the authors of the booklet that the Thomas More
lawyer would quote from during the Dover fiasco. Meyer was one of the
chief salesmen for teaching ID in the public schools at this time. What
Wells is telling the other ID fellows is that they made the decision to
start running the bait and switch instead of teach ID in the public
schools. In the report Wells names Minnich and DeWolf as also being
among the ID fellows that made the decision, but News accounts claimed
that the President of the Discovery Institute was in attendance with
half a dozen Discovery Institute staff members. This was a major event
for the Discovery Institute. They had finally gained enough public
notoriety for the Biblical creationists to want to teach their ID
science in the public schools. The Discovery Institute fellows decided
to start running the bait and switch instead of teaching ID. There is
no doubt that they understood that they were running the bait and switch
scam.

Meyer and DeWolf are authors of their teach ID booklet that they would
give out with their Wedge video before the bait and switch started.

This is the link from above. The booklet was still available on the
Discovery Institute web site during the Dover fiasco. They had not
stopped selling the teach ID ploy to the public, and they never
retracted what was written in their Teach the Controversy recommendations.

https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58

The Discovery Institute also ran the bait and switch on then Senator
Santorum. Santorum had allowed Phillip Johnson to draft his addition to
the "No child left behind" legislation, and it ended up in the appendix
of the bill, and the Discovery Institute heralded it as support for
teaching ID in the public schools. Santorum wrote an editorial before
the bait and switch went down March 14, 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_Amendment

https://www.arn.org/docs/ohio/washtimes_santorum031402.htm

QUOTE:
"I hate your opinions, but I would die to defend your right to express
them." This famous quote by the 18th-century philosopher Voltaire
applies to the debate currently raging in Ohio. The Board of Education
is discussing whether to include alternate theories of evolution in the classroom. Some board members however, are opposed to Voltaire's defense
of rational inquiry and intellectual tolerance. They are seeking to
prohibit different theories other than Darwinism, from being taught to students. This threatens freedom of thought and academic excellence.

Today, the Board of Education will discuss a proposal to insert
"intelligent design" alongside evolution in the state's new teaching
standards.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
This opposition to intelligent design is surprising since there is an increasing body of theoretical and scientific evidence that suggests an alternate theory is possible. Research has shown that the odds that even
one small protein molecule has been created by chance is 1 in a billion.
Thus, some larger force or intelligence, or what some call agent
causation, seems like a viable cause for creating information systems
such as the coding of DNA. A number of scientists contend that alternate theories regarding the origins of the human species - including that of
a greater intelligence - are possible.

Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that
should be taught in science classes.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
At the beginning of the year, President Bush signed into law the "No
Child Left Behind" bill. The new law includes a science education
provision where Congress states that "where topics are taught that may
generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum
should help students to understand the full range of scientific views
that exist." If the Education Board of Ohio does not include intelligent
design in the new teaching standards, many students will be denied a
first-rate science education. Many will be left behind.
END QUOTE:

Senator Santorum, obviously, did not know that the bait and switch was
going to go down. He expected the Discovery Institute to follow through
with the teach ID Wedge strategy, and the bait and switch obviously was
run on Santorum as well as the Ohio State school board that day. The
sad thing is that the Discovery Institute had to run the bait and switch
on Santorum again when the Dover fiasco hit the fan in Santorum's home

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait
and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait
and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes
when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20
years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/3/2024 10:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait
and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Nyikosian snipping and running from reality is stupid. You can remain willfully ignorant, but what good does it do you the next time that you
screw up because of your ignorance. Joining in with the others when you
didn't know what was going on isn't anything worth doing.

You might want to try to figure out what things would be like if ID had
not been a scam for over 20 years. What if they had never started
running the bait and switch, but had gone through with their original
Wedge strategy of teaching the junk in the public schools instead of
running the bait and switch. You have 20:20 hind sight, and you know
what the result of Kitzmiller was, so what do you think would be the
case, right now if the ID perps had not started running the bait and
switch scam over 20 years ago?

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/3/2024 2:23 PM, JTEM is my hero wrote:

Why is the rape of science in the case of evolution bad, while
the rape of science in the case of our climate good?

"Consistency is the greatest sin of the Clown World," to
quote myself.

I.D. had it's day and it may yet rise again, but right now there
are *Vastly* larger threats to science and education going on,
and you can't even tell them apart from real science.

Again: Gwobull Warbling!

Prioritize.

-- --

https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

Just a matter of fact history of what went down. You might have read it
to find that out. The links to what happened still exist, so that you
can verify it all for yourself. It is about ignoring reality, and not
about how stupid and dishonest everyone knows ID is today. The bait and
switch will go down on the next group of rubes that want to believe the
scam artists. There isn't much doubt that any effort will fail even if
they ignore the scam artists and try to teach the junk anyway. We
already have Dover as an example of that.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/4/2024 12:47 AM, jillery wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 14:18:02 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

<snip for focus>

I've been reading the chapter "What Darwinism Can Do" in Behe's 2007 book, >> _The Edge of Evolution_, and he very strongly argues there for the reality of common descent
and for the brilliance of Darwin's insights -- as far as they went.

Here is just one excerpt showing this:

"there's no reason to doubt that Darwin had this point right, that all creatures on earth are biological relatives." --p. 72.

There's plenty of arguments right on that page and the two preceding it, for this claim.
No wonder everyone here except me is afraid to talk about this book -- for opposite reasons!

The above quote is the closest I have read where Behe acknowledges *universal* common descent, as opposed to common descent, which is
consistent with the revisionist "kinds" advocated by AIG et al. So
thank you for doing, however unintentionally, what Harshman refused to
do.

Perhaps someday you will explain where you and Behe think Darwin's
insights failed.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

Behe hasn't made that much of a deal about "universal" common descent.
He usually just admits that common descent biological evolution is a
fact of nature and he usually puts up apes to humans as his example. He
made the point at the turn of the century in his responses to his
critics. He claimed that his critics could not use the anti-evolution
card against him because he was not anti-evolution. All he claimed was
that his designer had to have something to do with the evolution of life
on earth.

Behe has gone back pretty far for examples. The flagellum evolved over
a billion years ago and the adaptive immune system and blood clotting
system evolved around the time of the Cambrian explosion, so Behe has acknowleded that evolution had been happening for a very long time.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.� The bait >>> and switch strategy is a scam.� There is no reason to deny reality at

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes
when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20 years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-01-04 12:33:04 +0000, Kerr-Mudd, John said:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.� The bait >>>>> and switch strategy is a scam.� There is no reason to deny reality at >>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and
rubes> when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do
that,> you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for
over 20> years. All the evidence that you need is there in the
material that was> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened
you have links to> remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You're dreaming. He'll keep on about for at least another 20 years. He
still hasn't grasped that not wanting to read the same rants over and
over again is not the same as not wanting to figure out what has been
going on for over 20 years.


--
athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 10:59:55 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Lawyer Daggett
<[email protected]>:

On Thursday, January 4, 2024 at 1:47:30?PM UTC-5, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/4/24 10:20 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Thursday, January 4, 2024 at 12:32:29?PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2024-01-04 12:33:04 +0000, Kerr-Mudd, John said:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait
and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at >> >>>>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and
rubes> when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do >> >>>> that,> you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for >> >>>> over 20> years. All the evidence that you need is there in the
material that was> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened
you have links to> remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You're dreaming. He'll keep on about for at least another 20 years. He
still hasn't grasped that not wanting to read the same rants over and
over again is not the same as not wanting to figure out what has been
going on for over 20 years.

Maybe if we all voted to give him a lifetime achievement award for distinguished
service in the exposure of perps and rubes he would lose the chip on his shoulder.

I hereby announced the TOE awards.

The rules: anyone can nominate either a category or a post within a category,
or in the case of lifetime achievement awards an individual poster for that
category.

To kick things off, I nominate the category of lifetime achievement in the very
persistent proclamation of the existence of Purveyors Repeatedly and Egregiously
Promoting (PERPs) Scurrilous Content Attacking Materialism (SCAMs) targeted
towards Religious Unsophisticated BElivers. (RUBEs).

Please consider the history of posting to talk origins and see if you can think of
someone who has given their all to consistently and frequently remind any who
might listen, and even those who had heard it all before, of the nature of PERPS
promoting their SCAM to RUBEs.

Next, I might formulate a category for Science Fiction in support of Directed Panspermia

The award for TOE is a great idea. What's Directed Panspermia? Doe it
have anything to do with Jeremy Epstein?

Who is Jeremy Esptein? Is he related to the guy that Hillary strangled and made it
look like a suicide?

"...failed to make it look...".

--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/4/2024 6:33 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait >>>>> and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at >>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes
when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20
years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was
snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You guys are the ones that are going on about it as if there is some
issue with simply stating what reality has been for over 20 years. It
is really your issue. Think about it. Who made it an issue? It was
only to blame someone for their own incompetence. You may not have
known that, but what does that tell you about what you have been doing?
A lot of TO regulars missed out on what happened when the ID perps put
out their Top Six. That wasn't my fault because the IDiots didn't miss
what was going on. As far as I am concerned I didn't do anything to
warrant the sour grapes harassment for others being ignorant and
incompetent.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/4/2024 7:09 PM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Thursday, January 4, 2024 at 7:47:30 PM UTC-5, RonO wrote:

On 1/4/2024 6:33 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait >>>>>>> and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at >>>>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes >>>> when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20 >>>> years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was >>>> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You guys are the ones that are going on about it as if there is some
issue with simply stating what reality has been for over 20 years. It
is really your issue. Think about it. Who made it an issue?

Looks up to see who started this thread.

Raises hand. Ooooh Ooooh. Mr. Kotta, Mr. Kotta. I know.

You are one of the reasons why the post was needed. You guys made it an
issue. Face reality and take responsibility for your own stupidity.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/4/2024 8:37 AM, jillery wrote:

On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 05:45:37 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/4/2024 12:47 AM, jillery wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 14:18:02 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

<snip for focus>

I've been reading the chapter "What Darwinism Can Do" in Behe's 2007 book, >>>> _The Edge of Evolution_, and he very strongly argues there for the reality of common descent
and for the brilliance of Darwin's insights -- as far as they went.

Here is just one excerpt showing this:

"there's no reason to doubt that Darwin had this point right, that all creatures on earth are biological relatives." --p. 72.

There's plenty of arguments right on that page and the two preceding it, for this claim.
No wonder everyone here except me is afraid to talk about this book -- for opposite reasons!

The above quote is the closest I have read where Behe acknowledges
*universal* common descent, as opposed to common descent, which is
consistent with the revisionist "kinds" advocated by AIG et al. So
thank you for doing, however unintentionally, what Harshman refused to
do.

Perhaps someday you will explain where you and Behe think Darwin's
insights failed.

Behe hasn't made that much of a deal about "universal" common descent.
He usually just admits that common descent biological evolution is a
fact of nature and he usually puts up apes to humans as his example. He
made the point at the turn of the century in his responses to his
critics. He claimed that his critics could not use the anti-evolution
card against him because he was not anti-evolution. All he claimed was
that his designer had to have something to do with the evolution of life
on earth.

Behe has gone back pretty far for examples. The flagellum evolved over
a billion years ago and the adaptive immune system and blood clotting
system evolved around the time of the Cambrian explosion, so Behe has
acknowleded that evolution had been happening for a very long time.

Evolution via supernatural agency is a very different explanation than evolution via unguided natural processes. Common descent within kinds
is a very phenomenon than universal common descent. AIG accepts both supernatural agency and kinds, but explicitly rejects evolution as
described by NCSE. Depending on his audience, Behe's sophistry is
consistent with AIG or with NCSE. OTGH his continued advocacy of ID
and Devolution unambiguously marks him as an evolution pseudoskeptic,
IMO and YMMV.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

If you recall Ken Miller (the defender of real science) claims that the designer could have manipulated things by jiggling atoms. Miller
believes in an interactive god, he just understands that creationism
isn't science. Behe's type of god-did-it evolution isn't scientific.
The whole point of participating in the ID scam for Behe was to further
the stated mission of the Discovery Institute CRSC. That mission
statement did not list creating ID science as a major objective. The
Wedge document had ID in as a means to accomplish their stated mission.
The only time Behe makes the distinction between evolution within kinds
and evolution between kinds is when he is obfuscating the issue in order
to obtain creationist support. He claims to have no issue with the
evolution of humans from apes, and his whale debacle had him claiming
that whale evolution was macro evolution, but it was due to a bad type
of evolution that "Darwinian" mechanisms could account for. He called
it devolution, but he claimed that whales had evolved from terrestrial
mammals, just in a bad way. It is a crazy and stupid argument, but
Glenn and Nyikos lapped it up, and only wanted to be lied to with the
negative claims about evolution by breaking things and devolution. Behe
likely relies on that type of dishonest acceptance of his junk.

The ID scam has been stupid and dishonest for over 20 years, and Behe
has supported the effort and never resigned nor openly objected to what
the other ID perps have been doing, but only supported the effort by
keeping ID out there as bait. Behe and Minnich had claimed that doing
ID science was possible in Kitzmiler, and even put up an example of
testing that might be done, but he and Minnich admitted that they had
never bothered to do the science. All ID is, is bait. Behe knows that
they can't use ID to further their mission (he as even claimed that he
does not support teaching the junk in the public schools) and that the
switch scam is the only way forward for the ID perps.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:45:23 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/4/2024 6:33 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.� The bait >>>>> and switch strategy is a scam.� There is no reason to deny reality at >>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes
when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that,
you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20

20 years worth of arguing about who said what and when isn't worth my
while wading through. I'm just too stupid to remember it all anyway.
It's all I can do to look at current arguments.

years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was >> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You guys are the ones that are going on about it as if there is some
issue with simply stating what reality has been for over 20 years. It
is really your issue. Think about it. Who made it an issue? It was

You keep going on about it. I'd like to think that I can summarise on
behalf of the posters here that no-one here cares except you.

only to blame someone for their own incompetence. You may not have
known that, but what does that tell you about what you have been doing?
A lot of TO regulars missed out on what happened when the ID perps put
out their Top Six. That wasn't my fault because the IDiots didn't miss
what was going on. As far as I am concerned I didn't do anything to
warrant the sour grapes harassment for others being ignorant and incompetent.

No-one is currently blaming you, as far as I can see, for anything other
than dredging up this 20-year old stuff again and again.

Please move on, post something relevant to today. TIA.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:49:48 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning. The bait >>>> and switch strategy is a scam. There is no reason to deny reality at

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Nyikosian snipping and running from reality is stupid. You can remain
willfully ignorant, but what good does it do you the next time that you
screw up because of your ignorance. Joining in with the others when you
didn't know what was going on isn't anything worth doing.

You might want to try to figure out what things would be like if ID had
not been a scam for over 20 years. What if they had never started
running the bait and switch, but had gone through with their original
Wedge strategy of teaching the junk in the public schools instead of
running the bait and switch. You have 20:20 hind sight, and you know
what the result of Kitzmiller was, so what do you think would be the
case, right now if the ID perps had not started running the bait and
switch scam over 20 years ago?

Ron Okimoto

I know I really shouldn't but ….

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.

?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/5/2024 6:14 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:45:23 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/4/2024 6:33 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:52:24 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/3/2024 10:53 AM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/3/24 8:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 18:23:49 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait >>>>>>> and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at >>>>>>

[screed]

Hallelujah, brother!

Amen! Can we go on now?

You guys can all accept reality and stop whinning about perps and rubes >>>> when they are just a fact of life. If you aren't prepared to do that, >>>> you might want to try to figure out what has been going on for over 20

20 years worth of arguing about who said what and when isn't worth my
while wading through. I'm just too stupid to remember it all anyway.
It's all I can do to look at current arguments.

years. All the evidence that you need is there in the material that was >>>> snipped out. If you can't remember what happened you have links to
remind you.

Thank you. No need to keep on about it though.

You guys are the ones that are going on about it as if there is some
issue with simply stating what reality has been for over 20 years. It
is really your issue. Think about it. Who made it an issue? It was

You keep going on about it. I'd like to think that I can summarise on
behalf of the posters here that no-one here cares except you.

Who made it an issue? Why wouldn't I defend myself against the
stupidity of your efforts? If you didn't want to make it an issue, you
should not have joined in with the ones that were making it an issue.

only to blame someone for their own incompetence. You may not have
known that, but what does that tell you about what you have been doing?
A lot of TO regulars missed out on what happened when the ID perps put
out their Top Six. That wasn't my fault because the IDiots didn't miss
what was going on. As far as I am concerned I didn't do anything to
warrant the sour grapes harassment for others being ignorant and
incompetent.

No-one is currently blaming you, as far as I can see, for anything other
than dredging up this 20-year old stuff again and again.

Please move on, post something relevant to today. TIA.

You don't even know who made this an issue and why. Get someone to tell
you, and see how far you get. It is a stupid reason, and it should have
never happened.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/2024 1:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.

?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/019/304/old.jpg

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.

?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum.

?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out >>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions? >>>
As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply >>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even >>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it
failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to
teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying >>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark
when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

erik simpson <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply >>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue because he >>>>>> disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had messed >>>>>> up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his
incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my
opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no exceptions, >>>>>> so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even >>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it failed >>>>>> and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to teach >>>>>> in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying >>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark when >>>>>> he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for missing out >>>>>> on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their misconceptions? >>>>>>
As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, and >>>>>> it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left here >>>>>> on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the situation? >>>> Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more. We don't have any more creationists.
We have no reason to be!

I thought Mark Isaak was the Mark that Ron was going on about for whatever reason. Not MarkE. I find no real importance in finding out any more about
that tiff, but we will probably keep hearing about it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply >>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even >>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying >>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

erik simpson <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are >>>>>>>>> simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact >>>>>>>> and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time >>>>>>>> any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to >>>>>>>> teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They >>>>>>>> even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could >>>>>>>> not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able >>>>>>>> to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at >>>>>>>> lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking
Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of >>>>>>>> TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
We have no reason to be!

I thought Mark Isaak was the Mark that Ron was going on about for
whatever
reason. Not MarkE. I find no real importance in finding out any more
about
that tiff, but we will probably keep hearing about it.

Yeah, I thought it was MarkE.  I'm not reading this repetitive crap carefully, and I don't intend to.  Very tragic.

This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
you did what you did.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply >>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even >>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying >>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We >>> have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try
to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to
join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

Tell that to Mark and the others. Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply >>>>>>>>>> tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue >>>>>>>>> because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even >>>>>>>>> tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying >>>>>>>>> about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for >>>>>>>>> missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your >>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We >>>> have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of
lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being
wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for
making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others
were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try >>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to >>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

Tell that to Mark and the others.

Isaac or Isaak? Both?

Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 08:02:34 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

erik simpson <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

[]

This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
you did what you did.

The worst thing about TO is lack of snipping. The second worst thing about
TO is repetitive posts about some dispute 20 years ago.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue >>>>>>>>>> because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no >>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for >>>>>>>>>> missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your >>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We >>>>> have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have
made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that
they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of >>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory,
but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over
reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was
only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being >>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for >>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others >>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try >>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came
after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was
attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to >>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

Tell that to Mark and the others.

Isaac or Isaak? Both?

Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.

Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue >>>>>>>>>>> because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no >>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for >>>>>>>>>>> missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their >>>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle >>>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your >>>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the >>>>>>>>> situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have >>>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that >>>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of >>>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory, >>>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over >>>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality
didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was >>>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being >>>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for >>>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others >>>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try >>>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me
months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came >>>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was >>>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know >>>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to >>>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

Tell that to Mark and the others.

Isaac or Isaak? Both?

Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.

Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.

Why unless applied to your repetitive screeds? And are Isaac and Isaak the
same person? If so why not spell their name as they do. Weird.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/6/24 4:27 PM, RonO wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are
simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had
messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and >>>>>>> isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any >>>>>>> group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach >>>>>>> their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They >>>>>>> even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not >>>>>>> produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at
lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of
TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
We have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim.

As far as I have seen, on this issue Martin Harran and I are in complete agreement.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue. . .

That would be RonO. I was merely one of the messengers.

--
Mark Isaak
"Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/7/2024 10:59 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/7/2024 9:40 AM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 6:53 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here
who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue >>>>>>>>>>>> because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no
disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no >>>>>>>>>>>> exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able to >>>>>>>>>>>> teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking Mark >>>>>>>>>>>> when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for >>>>>>>>>>>> missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their >>>>>>>>>>>> misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of TO, >>>>>>>>>>>> and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about left >>>>>>>>>>>> here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle >>>>>>>>>>> in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but
most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made
this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your >>>>>>>>>> comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the >>>>>>>>>> situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists. We
have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim. Mark would not have >>>>>> made the stupid rhetorical lie if things were as Harran assumed that >>>>>> they are. Claiming that reality is just my opinion is the same type of >>>>>> lie creationists use when they claim that evolution is just a theory, >>>>>> but Mark is the one that played that card. Harran had stumbled over >>>>>> reality, but managed to pick himself up and amble on as if reality >>>>>> didn't matter. As sad as it may be Mark needed to claim that it was >>>>>> only my opinion because he needed to justify his harassment over being >>>>>> wrong about why the IDiots quit the ID scam. He wanted to blame me for >>>>>> making the IDiots quit, and when it turned out that he and some others >>>>>> were wrong they had to make up some lame reason for it. Mark had to try >>>>>> to justify what he had done so he is the one that was harassing me >>>>>> months after the original incident. I did not go after Mark, he came >>>>>> after me, and the others joined in. Someone even claimed that I was >>>>>> attacking Mark. That is how sad everyone has been about this.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know >>>>>> who made this an issue, and as sad as it is, you don't care, but have to >>>>>> join in anyway. It is the worst of TO.

Let it go.

Tell that to Mark and the others.

Isaac or Isaak? Both?

Really, Mark made this an issue
months after the original incident. This is the worst of TO.

Ah yes “the worst of TO”. New trope noted.

Obviously, a trope that is needed around here.

Why unless applied to your repetitive screeds? And are Isaac and Isaak the same person? If so why not spell their name as they do. Weird.

Obviously required repetitive knowledge that you should have understood
by now. Isn't it stupid that this is the excuse that Mark used?

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/7/2024 7:53 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 08:02:34 -0600
RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 7:00 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 4:51 PM, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

erik simpson <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote:

RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

[]

This is the worst of TO. You don't even know what is going on, and yet
you did what you did.

The worst thing about TO is lack of snipping. The second worst thing about
TO is repetitive posts about some dispute 20 years ago.

You don't have to worry about disputes from 20 years ago. The current
issue occurred within the last year twice. Not only that but the ID
perps have never stopped running the bait and switch scam. They will
likely put out a new edition of it this year since the last update was
in 2021. If you had read the history instead snipping it out and
thinking that you knew it all, you would have known that.

What you obviously need to worry about is understanding what the
situation is before jumping in as if you do know.

Ron Okimoto

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/7/2024 11:15 PM, Mark Isaak wrote:

On 1/6/24 4:27 PM, RonO wrote:

On 1/6/2024 3:03 PM, erik simpson wrote:

On 1/6/24 11:58 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:

On Saturday, January 6, 2024 at 2:17:31 PM UTC-5, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >>>>> RonO <[email protected]> wrote:

On 1/6/2024 12:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 18:03:01 -0600, RonO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>

On 1/5/2024 5:42 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

[...]

I know I really shouldn't but ….

My first instincts were right.

Does it never register with you that you are attacking people here >>>>>>>>> who:

1) Know and understand what you are posting about.

2) Totally agree with what you are saying.

3) Aren't complaining about the issues you identify, they are >>>>>>>>> simply
tired of your feelings about them being regurgitated ad nauseum. >>>>>>>>>
?

Does it ever register with you that Mark made this and issue
because he
disagreed. The only reason that he disagreed was because he had >>>>>>>> messed
up. Instead of dealing with reality he wanted to blame me for his >>>>>>>> incompetence, so he claimed that the bait and switch was only my >>>>>>>> opinion. It was an obvious lie, as you point out there should be no >>>>>>>> disagreement about that fact. The bait and switch is just a fact >>>>>>>> and
isn't just anyone's opinion, and has gone down every single time >>>>>>>> any
group of rubes wants to take the ID perps up on their offer to >>>>>>>> teach
their ID science in the public schools. There have been no
exceptions,
so you guys are reacting in the wrong way to Mark's claims. They >>>>>>>> even
tried to run the bait and switch on the Dover rubes, and when it >>>>>>>> failed
and the rubes tried to teach the junk anyway, the ID perps could >>>>>>>> not
produce the ID science that they had always claimed to be able >>>>>>>> to teach
in the public schools. You are all supporting Mark's attempt at >>>>>>>> lying
about the issue. There were even claims that I was attacking
Mark when
he started harassing me over this stupidity as an excuse for
missing out
on why the IDiots quit the ID scam over 5 years ago.

Mark isn't the only one that can't deal with reality.

Who snipped it out? Do you see anyone dealing with their
misconceptions?

As I have previously stated this is an example of the worst of >>>>>>>> TO, and
it happened when there wasn't much of anything to argue about
left here
on TO.

Ron Okimoto

Back to treating Ron like the beloved but cranky old uncle
in the corner who once in a while, utters something intelligible but >>>>>>> most of the time rambles on about his pet ideas.

As I have stated this is the worst of TO. Nothing registers. Who made >>>>>> this an issue? Do you even care? Did not Mark disagree with your
comment and make this an issue in spite of the reality of the
situation?
Mark falsified your claim. You do realize that, right?

Still???

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

MarkE isn't even here any more.  We don't have any more creationists.
We have no reason to be!

It was Mark Isaac that falsified Harran's claim.

As far as I have seen, on this issue Martin Harran and I are in complete agreement.

Then why did you try to lie about the situation by playing the
"opinion" card? Doesn't this mean that you knew that you were lying
about the issue in order to score some rhetorical point? The bait and
switch is fact. It has never stopped going down once they started to do
it. There are no examples of it not going down. It has totally failed
only once in Dover, and we all found out why they had to keep running
the bait and switch. There is no ID science that they have to give to
the rubes. All they have is the obfuscation and denial switch scam.

What is tragically sad about this is that most of you don't even know
who made this an issue. . .

That would be RonO.  I was merely one of the messengers.

That would be you and a couple of others. Take responsibility for what
you did. You only blame me for your own incompetence on this issue.

Ron Okimoto


--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 1/2/2024 6:23 PM, RonO wrote:
Instead of snipping and running from reality, most of TO should likely
read this straightforward history of the ID scam. From the comments a
lot of you never realized what was happening when it was happening. TO regulars should be able to add to this history.

In order to counter the incessant Nyikosian lies about the situation, I
have linked to news articles of the past to demonstrate that the ID
perps have been running the bait and switch. In the history below I
have the quote from Wells' report on the first bait and switch incident.
According to that report Wells understood that they were not going to
give the Ohio creationists any intelligent design science to teach, but
he still made this claim to the board according to a NY Times account.

QUOTE:
With equal fervor, Jonathan Wells, senior fellow at the Discovery
Institute, a Seattle organization dedicated to alternative scientific
theories, contended that there was enough valid challenge to Darwinian evolution to justify intelligent design's being ordered into the
classroom curriculum -- not as a religious doctrine, he maintained, but
as a matter of "a growing scientific controversy."
END QUOTE:

https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Ohio-debates-evolution-Scientists-accuse-2864344.php

When the ID perps were first claiming to be able to teach the junk in
the public schools there was no issue with "required" to be taught. I
do not recall the not "required" claims until after Kitzmiller.

Ron Okimoto

We likely have to get one thing straight from the beginning.  The bait
and switch strategy is a scam.  There is no reason to deny reality at
this time when everyone has 20:20 hindsight into what happened.  This is just a history of what the ID scam has been.  I've refrained from using perps and rubes, so there isn't that excuse for remaining willfully ignorant.  It is all anyone should need to understand what has been
going on with the ID scam for over 20 years.

Investopedia:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bait-switch.asp
QUOTE:
Bait and switch is a morally suspect sales tactic that lures customers
in with specific claims about the quality or low prices on items that
turn out to be unavailable in order to upsell them on a similar, pricier item.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Bait and switch tactics are often considered to be a type of fraud, and therefore is illegal. Bait and switch scams can fall under a number of violations, from breach of contract to false advertising.
END QUOTE:

The Discovery Institute is not running the bait and switch scam on the science side of the issue.  They run the bait and switch on the Biblical creationists that want to support the Discovery Institute's CRSC/CSC religious-political mission.

It should be noted that the Discovery Institute fellows who have been participating in the bait and switch, have claimed that the Wedge
Document was just a "fund raising" document as an excuse for their
religious political goals being in their Wedge Strategy.  This point is
not being made to label the Discovery Institute as a criminal
organization, but to present the obvious conclusion that the Discovery Institute has not only used their claims of being able to teach their intelligent design science in the public schools to attract the
creationist support in order to sell them their obfuscation and denial
switch scam (an alternative that the Discovery Institute claims has
nothing to do with their intelligent design science) but they have also
used the teach ID political ploy to obtain funding.

The Wedge document may have been written in 1998, and exposed in 1999,
it repeats the original mission statement of the Discovery Institute's
Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (the ID scam unit) and also
claims teaching ID in the public schools as one of their 5 year Wedge
goals.
The Wedge document:
https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf

One of their 5 year goals:
QUOTE:
Ten states begin to rectify ideological imbalance in their science
curricula & include design theory
END QUOTE

It is just a fact that when the Discovery Institute had convinced states
to teach ID they began running the bait and switch instead of following through with their stated Wedge strategy.  The Discovery Institute had secured enough notoriety so that they not only had to run the bait and
switch on Ohio in March 2002, but there were 3 or 4 other states within
the next month or two that had the bait and switch run on them.  I
recall Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Montana also came forward and wanted to teach intelligent design in their public schools.  The Discovery
Institute would have been well on their way to meeting their 5 year
goals, but they started running the bait and switch instead.

In politics the bait and switch is morally suspect, but not illegal
because the perpetrator can always claim that they just changed their
minds, but in the case of the ID scam, after changing their minds, they continued to sell intelligent design as the bait to this day.  So after
Ohio in 2002 all the subsequent bait and switch incidences were enacted
after the Discovery Institute's CRSC fellows had changed their minds
about being able to teach ID in the public schools.

The Thomas More lawyer defending the Dover ID creationists was fully
aware that the bait and switch was being run by the Discovery Institute,
but he called it a "strategy".  The bait and switch is a political
strategy, but is morally bankrupt, and dishonest.

http://ncse.com/news/2005/10/discovery-institute-thomas-more-law-center-squabble-aei-foru-00704

QUOTE:
So that caused us some concern about exactly where was the heart of the Discovery Institute. Was it really something of a tactical decision, was
it this strategy that they've been using, in I guess Ohio and other
places, where they've pushed school boards to go in with intelligent
design, and as soon as there's a controversy, they back off with a compromise. And I think what was victimized by this strategy was the
Dover school board, because we could not present the expert testimony we thought we could present
END QUOTE:

The so called "compromise" is the current obfuscation and denial teach
the controversy switch scam.  For political-legal reasons the Discovery Institute tells their creationist supporters that this switch scam has nothing to do with ID.  They tell this lie even though teaching ID in
the public schools was part of the original teach the controversy plan.

The bait and switch had gone down dozens of times before the Dover
fiasco hit the fan, and not a single group of creationist ID supporters
were given any ID science to teach in their public schools.  The bait
and switch has gone down in every single instance.

During the Dover fiasco after Barbara Forrest was deposed (Dembski was present at the deposition) for Kitzmiller, the Discovery Institute
fellows knew that the name switch from creationism to intelligent design
was going to be exposed, and half of them quit as expert witnesses.
Forrest had evidence that "Of Pandas and People" had been transformed
from a creationist textbook to intelligent design after the Supreme
Court decision that creation science wasn't any type of science that
could be taught in the public schools.  Thaxton was the editor, Kenyon
was one of the two main authors.  Behe admitted to writing some of
Pandas' later edition, but was not credited.  Meyer had written the
teachers notes for the textbook, and Dembski was then editing the next edition of Pandas.  The drafts of Dembski's book had also been
subpoenaed, but the subpoena was dropped when Dembski ran away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Pandas_and_People

Everyone should read the NCSE archive of the Thomas More lawyer incident because it has the Discovery Institute rep lying about the Discovery Institute claiming to be able to teach ID in the public schools, and the
More lawyer had to demonstrate that, that was a lie by pulling the
booklet on teaching ID in the public schools out of his pocket and
quoting from it.  This was the booklet that the Discovery Institute used
to give out with their ID Wedge video before they started running the
bait and switch in 2002.  In 2005 this booklet was still available in
pdf form for free when the Dover fiasco was occurring.

https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58

This link will take you back to a Discovery Institute web page to
download their Teach the Controversy strategy.  I accessed this web page
by looking at what Wayback had backed up of the Discovery Institute web
site in mid 2005.  Teaching ID was part of their "Teach the Controversy" Wedge strategy before they started running the bait and switch on
creationist ID supporters.  You can "click here" and download a pdf of
the booklet that the Thomas More lawyer quoted from. The material was
still available on the Discovery Institute web site during the Dover
fiasco.

The Dover creationists had followed their recommendations in obtaining
"Of Pandas and People" to teach the ID science.

From the Conclusions:
QUOTE:
Local school boards and state education officials are frequently
pressured to avoid teaching the controversy regarding biological
origins. Indeed, many groups, such as the National Academy of Sciences,
go so far as to deny the existence of any genuine scientific controversy about the issue.(162) Nevertheless, teachers should be reassured that
they have the right to expose their students to the problems as well as
the appeal of Darwinian theory. Moreover, as the previous discussion demonstrates, school boards have the authority to permit, and even
encourage, teaching about design theory as an alternative to Darwinian evolution--and this includes the use of textbooks such as Of Pandas and People that present evidence for the theory of intelligent design.
END QUOTE:

Original mission statement of the Discovery Institute CRSC (Center for Renewal of Science and Culture): http://web.archive.org/web/19980114111554/http://discovery.org/crsc/aboutcrsc.html

QUOTE:
THE proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one
of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. Its influence can be detected in most, if not all, of the West's greatest achievements, including representative democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and progress in the arts and sciences.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture
seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its damning
cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science
raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the
case for the supernatural. The Center awards fellowships for original research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the
opportunities for life after materialism.
END QUOTE:

If you use the above link you should note the Discovery Institute's logo
of God and Adam.  There was no doubt that the mission was a religious-political mission.  This is the mission that the fellows of
the CRSC signed up to accomplish.  This is likely the mission that they
are currently trying to fulfill by continuing to use ID as bait.

You should notice that developing real intelligent design science is not
part of the CRSC fellow's mission.  To accomplish this mission the
fellows have been prevaricating about being able to do the same science
as everyone else in order to demonstrate the existence of their
intelligent designer when their mission was to actually undermine a
basic component of real science.  Science can only work for things that
we can determine actually exist.  This is not the philosophical
materialism that the CRSC fellows want to combat, but they lump it in
with what they do not like.  Science is just the best means that we have figured out to understand nature, and it turned out that any ID science
that they wanted to accomplish would have just demonstrated that nature wasn't the Biblical creation described in the Bible.  This is the reason
why the Top Six presented in the order in which they must have logically occurred in this universe killed ID on TO back in Nov. 2017.  The
Biblical creationists supporting the ID scam on TO could not deal with
the reality that the Top Six represented.  The designer that filled
those gaps was not their Biblical designer, and most of them quit
supporting the ID scam.

Intelligent design was a part of the Wedge strategy to accomplish their religious-political mission.

The Wedge document:
https://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf

Phillip Johnson has claimed that getting ID taught in the public schools
was part of the Wedge Strategy to achieve the religious-political goals
of the Discovery Institute's CRSC Mission Statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy

QUOTE:
Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God,
before the academic world and into the schools.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
The wedge strategy details a simultaneous assault on state boards of education, state and federal legislatures and on the print and broadcast media.[33] The Discovery Institute has carried out the strategy through
its role in the intelligent design movement, where it aggressively
promoted ID and its Teach the Controversy campaign to the public,
education officials and public policymakers.[34] Intelligent design proponents, through the Discovery Institute, have employed a number of specific political strategies and tactics in their furtherance of their goals. These range from attempts at the state level to undermine or
remove altogether the presence of evolutionary theory from the public
school classroom, to having the federal government mandate the teaching
of intelligent design, to 'stacking' municipal, county and state school boards with ID proponents.[35]
END QUOTE:

TO participants that were posting in the 1990's should recall that intelligent design first came to our attention as something that the anti-evolution Biblical creationists wanted to teach in the public
schools.  Initially teaching intelligent design was a major part of the Teach the Controversy political ploy, but they dropped ID out of their
Teach the Controversy material after they started running the bait and switch. The Teach the Controversy ploy became the switch scam, and
wasn't supposed to mention that ID had ever existed.  You can just go
back up to the conclusions of their 1999 public school ID propaganda
quoted above to note that ID was definitely part of the original Teach
the Controversy strategy.  The title of the booklet is "Teaching the Controversy: Darwinism, Design and the Public School Science
Curriculum".  By continuing to use ID as bait, they are just continuing
with their original mission.

When the bait and switch started to go down Johnson retired from his ARN
ID Blog one month later.  He did not give up on teaching ID in the
public schools, and he came back to support the Dover effort.  Johnson
sat in the Federal courtroom every day of testimony.  After that Johnson quit supporting teaching ID in the public schools and admitted that the
ID science had never existed.  The Discovery Institute doubled down
after Dover and put out their current teach ID propaganda even after
Phillip Johnson's admission.  The Discovery Institute intelligent design Wedge advocates could not give up on using ID as bait.  The obfuscation
and denial switch scam was their only way forward with their Wedge
goals, and the creationist ID supporters were not interested in the obfuscation and denial switch scam.  They needed to keep using
Intelligent design as bait to dishonestly garner creationist support for their Wedge goals. All the Discovery Institute ID fellows accepted this
as the way forward in trying to achieve their Wedge goals.  None of the fellows at the Discovery Institute have ever protested the bait and
switch strategy, nor resigned because of it.  Probably most of the
current fellows that have signed up after Kitzmiller, signed up knowing
that bait is all they could expect ID to be used for.  None of them have ever produced any legitimate ID science nor have they tried to create something positive from their "best evidence" for intelligent design.

Phillip Johnson's admissions about intelligent design Spring 2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20070609171527/http:/sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles/issue10/evolution.pdf

QUOTE:
I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design
at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the
Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully
worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s
comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific
people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
For his part, Johnson agrees: "I think the fat lady has sung for any
efforts to change the approach in the public schools…the courts are just not going to allow it. They never have. The efforts to change things in
the public schools generate more powerful opposition than accomplish anything…I don’t think that means the end of the issue at all."
END QUOTE:

Even after Johnson made these admissions the Discovery Institute
continued to use ID as bait:
https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/

If you download their current edition of this teach ID propaganda (they
have updated it around every 3 years since producing it after
Kitzmiller) you will find their Science Education Policy that they put
up on their web site after Kitzmiller.  It claims that there is a
legitimate scientific theory of ID to teach in the public schools, but
they do not want ID "required" to be taught.  In 2013 both Louisiana and Texas wanted to use their "Teach the Controversy" switch scam to teach
ID in their public schools, and both states claimed that they were not requiring teaching ID, but were only providing the teachers with the
means to teach the material if they wanted to.  The Discovery Institute
ran the bait and switch on both states again, and reminded them that the switch scam had nothing to do with ID.  The Discovery Institute removed
this paragraph from the Science Education policy then up on their web
page, but you can still find the intact education policy on page 15 of
their current teach ID propaganda.

QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:

They simply deleted this paragraph from their education policy on their
web site, left the rest intact, and continued to use ID as bait.  Their bogus claim of not "requiring" ID to be taught had just been an excuse
for using ID as the bait and never giving their creationist supporters
any ID science to teach.

There should be no doubt that the Discovery Institute intelligent design advocates have been perpetrating the bait and switch scam on creationist
ID supporters for over 20 years (since March 2002).

They last updated their teach ID propaganda in 2021, but subsequently reformatted the site and seem to have reverted to the 2018 edition.

The Discovery Institute has a new Science Education Policy up where the "required" denial returns front and center, so that ID can be used as
the bait, but the policy is heavily pushing the obfuscation and denial
switch scam.  They are literally running the bait and switch on the
rubes with their current education policy.  The rubes have obviously
come in to get the ID science, but now they are told, obliquely, that
they do not want to teach the ID science, but there is this nifty
obfuscation and denial stupidity that they should teach instead.  After
the bait and switch on both Louisiana and Texas when they were not "requiring" ID to be taught, everyone should know that this is just
their continued efforts to use ID as bait.  They have no intention of providing any ID science for anyone to teach in the public schools.

https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/

They have not retracted their claims about having the ID science to
teach in the public schools, and one thing that you will notice is that
both Louisiana and Texas have had to have the bait and switch run on
them again after bending over for the switch scam (twice for Louisiana).
 This means that those two states only adopted the the switch scam as a means to keep trying to teach creationism in their public schools.  No
one likes the switch scam, and all the states mentioned have never
really implemented it.  Ohio was the only state to not only bend over
for the switch scam, but actually try to implement it without trying to
teach creationism, and they dropped the whole deal after Kitzmiller.
None of the other states mentioned never seemed to have implemented
their policy changes, at least, they have never put out how a teacher
was supposed to implement the policies.  No lesson plans, and no
teaching materials have been provided to get the switch scam obfuscation
and denial taught.  The creationists really do not want to teach their
kids enough science for them to understand what they have to deny.

It should be noted that the ID Network quit the ID scam back in 2009.
Their web site remained dormant until a message appeared that you could
look for them as COPE.  COPE was their effort to get the switch scam
taught in the public schools without having ID in the name of their organization. COPE was a failure, and I do not recall any instances
where the ID Network was able to sell anyone the switch scam through
that organization.  The ID Network is back using ID as bait, and they
admit that COPE was their effort.  The Biblical creationists were not interested in the switch scam, and did not want to teach their kids
enough science for them to understand what they have to deny if they can
not tell them why they have to deny the science.

http://intelligentdesignnetwork.org/about/

I can't recall when they founded COPE, but their history claims that it
was in 2011.  After the COPE efforts failed they fired up the ID Network again.

It should be noted that in all the years that the Discovery Institute
has advocated teaching intelligent design in the public schools they
have never produced a public school lesson plan demonstrating that they
had any ID science to teach, how the subject would be taught, what
materials a teacher could use to teach the subject, and how the students would be evaluated on what they should have learned.  Before they
started running the bait and switch they recommended using "Of Pandas
and People" to teach intelligent design, but they stopped doing that
after Kitzmiller for obvious reasons.

The Discovery Institute used to have someone whose job it was to make
sure that the bait and switch went down on any creationist school boards
or legislators that wanted to teach the ID science.  That person was
running the Bait and Switch on the Utah creationists back in Nov. 2017
when the Discovery Institute was putting out their Top Six best
evidences for ID.  She left the Discovery Institute, and I don't know if they replaced her.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/dear-utah-teach-about-the-scientific-controversy-over-evolution-not-about-intelligent-design/

QUOTE:
SARAH CHAFFEE
Now a teacher, Sarah Chaffee served as Program Officer in Education and Public Policy at Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.
END QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Let’s be clear: We think that Utah should not include intelligent design
in their science standards. Our Science Education Policy states:

As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state boards of education….

…. Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public
K-12 schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of
evolution in curricula. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to
critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
END QUOTE:

The Texas and Lousiana examples demonstrates how the Discovery Institute
is actually using their "requiring" recommendation.

Anyone wonder why she isn't quoting from the their "Educator's Briefing Packet" where the Discovery Institute sold the Utah creationists on
teaching ID in the first place?

From the Briefing Packet, link given previously:
QUOTE:
Has ID Been Banned from Public Schools?

No. Science teachers have the right to teach science.
Since ID is a legitimate scientific theory, it should be
constitutional to discuss in science classrooms and it
should not be banned from schools. If a science teacher
wants to voluntarily discuss ID, she should have the
academic freedom to do so.
END QUOTE:

In the Kitzmiller Wiki the Discovery Institute person responsible for
running the bait and switch at the time that the Dover fiasco hit the
fan was named as Seth Cooper.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

QUOTE:
This story made the York newspapers, and Buckingham was telephoned by Discovery Institute staff attorney Seth Cooper, whose tasks included "communicating with legislators, school board members, teachers, parents
and students" to "address the topic of ID in a scientifically and educationally responsible way" in public schools. He later stated that
he made the call to "steer the Dover Board away from trying to include intelligent design in the classroom or from trying to insert creationism
into its cirriculum [sic]", an account Buckingham has disputed. Cooper
sent the book and DVD of Icons of Evolution to Buckingham, who required
the Dover High School science teachers to watch the DVD. They did not
take up the opportunity to use it in their classes.
END QUOTE:

Cooper's job had likely become routine.  The bait and switch had gone
down dozens of times by the time Dover hit the fan, and it was common knowledge that the Discovery Institute was running the bait and switch.
No one had ever gotten any ID science to teach for 3 years.  It was
likely that it only took one phone call to make the creationists realize
that they did not want to teach ID if the guys that sold them the scam
were telling them not to do it, but Cooper screwed up and did not follow
up and make sure that the Dover creationists had gotten that message. He
had run into a group of creationists just as dishonest as the Discovery Institute ID fellows, but too ignorant to realize that the ID bait and
switch scam had come from the Discovery Institute, and that they were disregarding the advice of the scam artists who had been selling ID as
bait to the public.

This reality is never going to change and all of you can look back on
what the Discovery Institute has been doing since starting to run the
bait and switch back in March 2002.  By 2002 the ID perps were best
known for wanting to teach their ID science in the public schools and
the Wedge document, and Phillip Johnson claimed that getting ID taught
was part of their Wedge strategy, but when it came time to put up or
shut up they decided to start running the bait and switch.  They could
not stop using ID as the bait because most Biblical creationists can't
stand the obfuscation and denial switch scam if they can't tell the
students why they have to deny the science.

Jonathan Wells participated in the first bait and switch on the Ohio
State Board of Education, and part of his job was to write up a report
on the incident.  This is a WayBack archive of that report.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110814145400/http://www.creationists.org/archived-obsolete-pages/2002-03-11-OSBE-wells.html

QUOTE:
Steve Meyer and I (in consultation with others) had decided ahead of
time that we would not push for including intelligent design (ID) in the state science standards, but would propose instead that the standards
include language protecting teachers who choose to teach the controversy.
END QUOTE:

Meyer was not only the director of the CRSC of the Discovery Institute,
but was one of the chief cheerleaders for teaching ID in the public
schools, and one of the authors of the booklet that the Thomas More
lawyer would quote from during the Dover fiasco. Meyer was one of the
chief salesmen for teaching ID in the public schools at this time.  What Wells is telling the other ID fellows is that they made the decision to
start running the bait and switch instead of teach ID in the public schools.  In the report Wells names Minnich and DeWolf as also being
among the ID fellows that made the decision, but News accounts claimed
that the President of the Discovery Institute was in attendance with
half a dozen Discovery Institute staff members. This was a major event
for the Discovery Institute.  They had finally gained enough public notoriety for the Biblical creationists to want to teach their ID
science in the public schools.  The Discovery Institute fellows decided
to start running the bait and switch instead of teaching ID.  There is
no doubt that they understood that they were running the bait and switch scam.

Meyer and DeWolf are authors of their teach ID booklet that they would
give out with their Wedge video before the bait and switch started.

This is the link from above.  The booklet was still available on the Discovery Institute web site during the Dover fiasco.  They had not
stopped selling the teach ID ploy to the public, and they never
retracted what was written in their Teach the Controversy recommendations.

https://web.archive.org/web/20040921022045/http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=58

The Discovery Institute also ran the bait and switch on then Senator Santorum. Santorum had allowed Phillip Johnson to draft his addition to
the "No child left behind" legislation, and it ended up in the appendix
of the bill, and the Discovery Institute heralded it as support for

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)